Cubs acquire Jose Quintana for Eloy Jimenez, Dylan Cease and two others

In the first blockbuster of the Major League trade season the Chicago Cubs and their crosstown rivals completed an unexpected deal with the Cubs sending their top two prospects, OF Eloy Jimenez and RHP Dylan Cease, in exchange for one of the most reliable left handed starters in all of baseball the past five years, Jose Quintana.

I know that this deal will be a tough pill to swallow for some. Quintana is currently having his worst season (4-8, 4.49 ERA), while Jimenez and Cease are the two crown jewels of the Cubs system and have shown flashes of brilliance the past two seasons. But there are several key factors to keep in mind. First and foremost: The Cubs are still a contender and the rotation was badly in need of a boost. They just acquired a #2-3 starter without making any subtractions from their Major League roster. If the young offensive players can right themselves in the second half the Cubs are now in a position to take advantage of the situation with four solid starters lined up for the postseason.

Another factor to consider is that this trade is not just about a 2017 run. Jose Quintana is not just the type of cost controlled starter that they Cubs have been seeking for years, but he has one of the most fantastic contracts for a proven left handed starter in the league. Quintana is owed approximately 3.5 million for the rest of 2017 and then just 8.5 million in 2018. After that the Cubs will have tremendous flexibility as very reasonable team options exists for the next two seasons (10.5M and 11.5M respectively). So, in total the Cubs control the 28 year old lefty for the next 3.5 years and at most will pay him 34 million dollars.

The Cubs were also badly in need of starting pitching heading into 2018 and beyond. Quintana can now team with Jon Lester and Kyle Hendricks for the foreseeable future. Due to injury and stagnation from a couple of starting pitching prospects in the upper levels of the Minor Leagues this season, the team possessed no reliable internal options for filling as many as three rotation slots behind Lester and Hendricks in 2018. They now possess a starting pitching core that provides the team flexibility heading into the offseason. While at least one more arm will be required for 2018, the team no longer needs to acquire a top of the rotation starter, and can instead focus on only seeking out deals that make sense and will not need to dive head first into the free agent market.

Eloy Jimenez

Eloy Jimenez

The price was indeed high, but not untenable. Eloy Jimenez now joins fellow high-profile IFA signings Gleyber Torres and Jorge Soler as the key piece in a major trade for arms to help out the big league club. The big slugger has participated in the past two Futures Games, including a dazzling performance last year, and continued to break out despite missing the first part of 2017 due to injury. His power potential is as high as any prospect in the minors and he has been developing a nice all-around game at the plate, learning plate discipline and when to drive the ball the other way. He now joins Yoan Moncada, Luis Robert and Michael Kopech in the White Sox system as consensus top 20 prospects in all of baseball.

Dylan Cease is of course the other major piece in this deal. Featuring an upper 90s fastball and power 12-6 curve Cease has posted imposing strikeout numbers throughout his short career. He is not without risk as a prospect however. An elbow injury in High School required Tommy John surgery and the Cubs have handled him with kid gloves the past two seasons as he has worked his way back to health. A lack of command and a reliable third pitch at this point (his change-up is a work in progress) have some projecting his future to be in a Major League bullpen where he would undoubtedly be expected to become a lights out closer, but there is still plenty of time for him to refine his command and change-up in order to reach his top of the rotation potential.

The other pieces of the deal are Matt Rose and Bryant Flete. Rose is a tall and lanky corner infielder with a long swing but legit power. He is a long shot, but it never hurts to have a guy with that kind of power around in case you can clean up his swing. Bryant Flete is a nice organizational player. He was once a SS/2B with decent speed, but he has filled out in recent years and is 2B-only at this point and is no longer a threat on the base paths. He has broken through with added power this year to become a Carolina League All-Star but he is limited by a low ceiling.

Filed under: trades

Comments

Leave a comment
  • It will be interesting to see what happens next. If the Cubs follow last year’s template, than this is the big trade, but there may be one more involving Candelario.

    After this season, these contracts come off the books (approximate values):
    Montereo: $7m
    Arrieta: $15m
    Lackey: $16m
    Davis: $10m
    Uehara: $6m
    Duensing: $2m
    John Jay: $8m
    (Hector Rondon will enter Arbitration maybe they just DFA him?): $6m

    That’s approximately $70m. Arbitration will increase salaries. But the Cubs will be well positioned to re-sign players, go after free agents, and/or keep the power dry for the post-2018 FA class.

    Also, losing Cease potentially hurts. But the Cubs did draft some potentially good SP this year and last, so hopefully some of them start to develop and move through the system quickly.

  • In reply to Cubswin09:

    It will be interesting to see which Starting Pitchers hit the Market. It seems to be getting fewer and fewer each year.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cubswin09:

    I think Montero's contract is $14M. The Cubs agreed to pay his full salary when acquiring him from ARI so they didn't have to send as highly rated prospects.

    They might bring some of these guys back. It isn't impossible that they sign Davis. But at most he gets a $5-8M AAV raise. That doesn't put much of a dent in the overall budget.

    The more I think about it the more I like this deal.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    I thought his contract was $14m as well. This site said $7m. It's on the internet, so it has to be true!

    http://www.spotrac.com/mlb/chicago-cubs/

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cubswin09:

    Probably $7M remaining on his contract?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cubswin09:

    Has the whole world gone crazy!!!?! Eloy is arguably the top prospect in baseball. Hes certainly in the top 10-15. And cease was by far the highest rated arm in the cubs farm. They should have made this deal for sale perhaps but what are theo and jedd thinking?!!
    I dont know how they managed to top that terrible Castro trade in such a short time but my goodness. I am very disappointed.
    Those saying Eloy was blocked havent watched a game all year.
    This front office has been spoiled to the point where Starlin castros, jorge solers, and top 5 prospects like gleyber torres and eloy jiminez are just discarded for rentals and, in this case, a good cost controlled but not elite pitcher.
    Candelario's next everybody. What a waste.
    Thanks for the one world series, coulda been 3 or more.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Randall Clark:

    I agree w you. They really fouled up the Castro deal especially giving back the main piece Adam Warren in the Chapman deal. Totally ridiculous

    This move is very smart. Unless Eloy becomes a cross between Mike Trout and 2017 Aaron Judge, we will be fine. Would I have preferred they gave up more and got Sale? Depends how much more, but Cease and Eloy wouldn't be enough for Sale. You have to give up something of value to get something of value.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    "This move is very smart. Unless Eloy becomes a cross between Mike Trout and 2017 Aaron Judge"
    I agree, but how will we know that, until it's too late?
    Look at Judge's numbers while he was in the minors, or even last year.
    I was really eyeing Jimenez as a replacement for Heyward.......

  • In reply to Treebeard:

    I think it is pretty safe to assume Heyward will not be opting out of his deal at this point. He is going to be here a while.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Personally I was hoping the cubs would add heyward as a part of a Verlander deal to offset some money.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    youll still get elite defense from Heyward.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    That isn't why we got him. We got him to hit in the 2 hole and be a table setter.

  • In reply to WaitTilNextYear:

    Exactly, we could have Almora Jr. in CF or RF and play 'elite defense' for significantly cheaper than Heyward.
    In 2 years, we could have had an above average defender in RF, with 40+ 2B and 30+ HR potential who went from a 4-1 strikeout to walk ratio to a 2-1 ratio when he moved UP a level. We also threw in Billy McKinney in the Chapman deal last year.
    Would be nice to have either Jimenez or McKinney instead of Candelario / Zangunis / La Stella, I understand valuing over outfielders; but I'd like to have some outfielders in our system to push the guys ahead of them on the depth chart.......

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    "I think it is pretty safe to assume Heyward will not be opting out of his deal at this point. He is going to be here a while."

    He is able to be traded in 2019 & 2020. We'll see. Not saying they'd get much for him if his bat doesn't come back to be decent, but it's far from certain he'll remain on the team thru the duration of his contract.

    Just as Theo and Jed were motivated to improve their team by paying a hefty but fair price to get Quintana, if they feel their best OF doesn't include Heyward in 2019/2020, they'll do what it will take to move him.

    Time will tell.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Treebeard:

    In life and baseball, sometimes you have to take a chance.

    Replacement for Heyward? You have some inside info that Heyward is going to retire in the next couple of years? If not, he's not opting out and leaving all those millions on the table. Opt out? No chance anyone will pay him 60-70% of what he will be getting from us.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    I thought those years were team options not player options, and I would be ecstatic if Heyward, prayerfully, starts hitting anywhere near where he was during his peak year.......

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Treebeard:

    Heyward's options are "player options" and I think that the 2nd one ONLY can be exercised if he reaches 600 PAs or something like that. So if he comes up short he doesn't get the 2nd option. But I doubt he leaves.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    He can be traded though.

    If the Cubs feel their best OF moving forward reads Schwarber/Almora/Happ, he'll be moved.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Quedub, yes, he can be traded. I was only talking about his opt-outs.

  • In reply to Randall Clark:

    So, you're saying that the Cubs aren't capable of winning a World Series with the current lineup, but two unproven Class A players would have made the difference? The plan, since day 1, has been to develop so much talent in the system that some of it can be traded for needed capabilities. Now that they've got more talent than they can fit on the field with more coming, the angst overflows every time someone is traded. Yes, Candelario will likely be next, as he should be.

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    I was waiting to see how long before someone used the "proven/unproven" argument

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Tom U:

    It has been a while. Check out the Minor League Recap. I think I even used it there!

  • In reply to Tom U:

    Someone had to be first...
    You can't ignore those words when discussing prospects. The "next" Mike Trout doesn't have the value of Mike Trout.

    I was just trying to make sense of the OPs statement that this trade REDUCED the odds of the Cubs winning another WS. Maybe, over the next decade, he'll be correct, but I'd rather see upgrades to the current team than wait to see how Eloy turns out at the MLB level.

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    Trout was the 25th player drafted. Only 12 of the others drafted with him have made it to the ML level yet.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cliff1969:

    But they still have a 4-5 year window to win it all. That's the point. They'll get the bats & pitching back together by then. Hopefully

  • In reply to Wrigley0923:

    That 4-5 year window is exactly what Theo had in mind when he traded for Quintana. Eloy wouldn't be able to help until the last half of that window, if ever.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cliff1969:

    Theo and Co. Signrd for 5 more years. They made the right trade (imo), and the window is wide open now. They have the IF set (with plenty of room to move guys around), the OF is very talanted(play Alnora more), it's just the SP that has stunk all season. Jay was an awesome bridge for Almora though.

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    cliff, if you want to talk unproven, lets look at swarber .210 career BA at this point. will he be better than that, probably, but he hasn't proven it yet. russell is a career .237 hitter not proven yet.

  • In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    Exactly. Russell is a great example of why we shouldn't have a meltdown when prospects are traded. Oakland fans who exploded when Russell was traded to the Cubs ended up looking silly. Imagine the hue and cry had the Cubs tried to trade Schwarber while he was still in A ball. I think he'll figure it out, but a lot more people are calling for a trade nowadays. Those melting down over the loss of Eloy may, or may not, look foolish a few years from now.

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    Completely agree. These are assets meant to be used to get the pieces they need. The Sox need prospects and we need arms. Maybe it helps this year but it keeps the Cubs competitive for several years to come. Good move for both teams

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Randall Clark:

    Yes, Jiminez is a Top 10 prospect. However I haven't seen anyone put him as a #1 but I suppose it is possible. I don't read all the rankings. But Sale would have cost a good deal more. Moncada is usually considered a better prospect than Jiminez and Kopech is getting close to Top-10 prospect himself. WAY ahead of Cease. Believe it or not this is about what these guys are worth.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Obviously the cubs fo knows more about these guys ceilings than I do, but this doesnt add up too well in my opinion. I think they are undervaluing their talent and its costing them better trades at the very least.
    People love talking about what it could take to get mike trout. I think a package of Gleyber, Eloy, Jorge Soler, and Starlin plus Cease and some of those throw-ins like mckinney could have got the angels attention. I personally think the cubs lose that trade.

    Offering the expiring contracts of Wade Davis, Aroldis Chapman + Jose quintana, on the other hand, would get the cubs laughed out of the building.

    Theo is losing trades left and right.

  • In reply to Randall Clark:

    Yes, the Cubs gave away more talent than they received. But they received more certainty and more current value, while giving potentially giving away value down the road. That is how this works. You don't get a guy like Quintana by only giving up prospects with the same upside as him, especially considering his contract, and especially considering the two guys we dealt are in A ball.

    It is okay to lose some trades if it is strengthen your current championship window. These are not the kind of trades you make when you are still building toward the summit, but when you are already established within your window of contention you need to take some risks to stay there.

    The only deal I didn't like was the Chapman deal. I said all along I would have preferred the Cubs add to Torres in order to get Miller instead, but in the end it still worked out pretty well.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Ernst:

    One could argue the yankees ended up getting less for Miller, especially when you consider his contract. I agree the cubs should have probably focused their pursuit on him rather than chappy, and this is coming from a guy who liked chapman as a player

  • In reply to Randall Clark:

    I have no doubt that Miller was the Cubs' first choice and they would have had him if the price was right. It would have taken more than they gave for Chapman.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cliff1969:

    If memory serves me it was going to take the Schwarbenator as the headliner instead of Torres. Easy to monday morning quarterback it now.

    Even though I preferred Miller over Chapman w all things equal, but they weren't as Miller came w an extra year of control.

    If Miller resigns w the Yanks after this year, Cashman is a genius.

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    Yankees were willing to trade Miller straight up for an injured Schwarber.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Randall Clark:

    The Yankees kind of misplayed their hand last year, but it actually worked to their advantage. The Cubs deal that they WANTED for Miller was better than what the Indians offered. But the Cubs balked at giving up Schwarber. So both teams moved on to talk about another piece: Chapman. The Yankees got a nice haul for Chapman. Then the Indians came calling in the last couple days and the Yankees were able to fleece them. It was possible that when the Cubs walked away the Yankees would wind up with Miller pitching for a mediocre team in August/September. Instead, they were able to use the trade deadline as leverage and probably had several suitors and got a bidding war going for Miller. The Cubs were removed from the market but the Yankees already had a prize from them. I still say the timeline actually worked well for the Yankees.

  • In reply to Randall Clark:

    I liked the Chapman trade. It was painful to give up Torres. But you can't argue with the results.

    When you complain about Jimenez just think back to soler 5 years ago. The trade for Quintana is a very good deal for the cubs (possible 4 playoff runs) in exchange for two A ball players. I would take that every time. We can review the results after the 2020 world series to determine who won this trade.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Outstanding explanation, Michael. The Cubs are giving the White Sox enormous *potential* value. But there is a chance that one or both "flame-out."

    And then there is the factor of when Cease and Jiminez are ready (probably 2019-2021 time frame...and that presumes no set-backs) the Cubs may be in a vey different position. Talent wise they are still big guys on the block (though WAS and LAD can match them overall). There is a certain amount of "strike while the iron is hot."

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Randall Clark:

    Lol

  • In reply to Randall Clark:

    I think you're undervaluing the cost of a cost controlled SP. this is a starters market all the buyers are looking for controllable SP. I think it's a high price but I guess I expected to give something of tremendous value to get a Quintana type I think he's the perfect fit for our needs. Kudos to the white sox for not being stubborn and doing what's in their franchises best interests I always thought it was stupid that they refuse to deal with us considering we're in opposite leagues

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to kkhiavi:

    Its hard to sell something as cost controlled when you are giving away elite prospects. This isnt a small market team either. But i do understand that the Cubbies havent developed anybody with staying power since Carlos Zambrano.
    And i will admit i tend to value hitters who crush the ball like Soler and Eloy more than most of my fellow amateur talent evaluators but they are a more reliable commodity than pitchers. Quintana might be cost controlled but hes one wrong twist of the elbow away from missing half of his remaining contract.

  • In reply to Randall Clark:

    The nice thing about Quintana's deal is that the final two years are in the form of team options. If he blows out his elbow the Cubs can walk away with only a 1M buyout. There is almost no risk on the Cubs end.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    than you have given jimenez and cease away for 1 year of quintana not 3. there are no potental impact bats left in this system. some may become that but not with jimenez's potential. i looked at the cubs top 30 as it now stands. there are 11 postition players 2 are back-up catchers,2 back-up outfielders, 1 is a back-up infielder.as it stands now this is probably a low to mid-twenties system. the :"waves of talent" thing is done. as an aside the two players moved into the top 30 to replace cease and jimenez. teng and maples. good grief.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    This guy gets it. International signings are going to be huge next year

  • In reply to Randall Clark:

    yes but now they can't blow it out anymore. hard cap spending of 4.75 mil plus whatever they can trade for.

  • In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    It would be 1.5 years, or 2.5 or 3.5 years. Seeing as how we traded away Torres for .5 years of Chapman that seems like a deal to me.

    Where exactly would we play the next wave of position players? We already have Candelario, Zagunis and Young sitting in AAA without an opening and Vosler/Burks in AA. We don't need anybody for the next 2 years. With the exception of Jay this offseason the Cubs do not have a single position player eligible for FA until after the 2020 season, and that is only La Stella. In 2021 is when we have Baez, Bryant, Rizzo and Russell all coming up. By then we will have Amaya, Ademan, Wilson, Paredes, Martinez, Galindo as potential starters (although a few of those guys are boom/bust).

    The Cubs do have a wave of pitching coming in about two years. injuries/regression will cull some of them, but they figure to get one starter out of Clifton, Alzolay, Hatch, De La Cruz, Underwood, Steele and probably a reliever or two. Behind that we have Albertos, Hudson, Moreno and others. And don't sleep on Maples as a potential back end of the bullpen piece, the guy's stuff has been absolutely electric this season.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    zagunis and young were two of the back-ups i mentioned. jiminez is at least two years away so i wasn't worried about "today" for him. however, it isn't just free agency we are looking at. arbitration for these guys will start soon and they will all get expensive together. then you have luxury tax issues. also, you can't say all of these guys have "made it" yet . at this point swarbs is a career .210 hitter with a high in his first half season of .246 which was forgotten alittle after he went off in the playoffs. do i think he is better than that. yes , but he hasn't proven it yet. same with russell, a .237 hitter careerwise. will he be what was projected, hope so , but who knows. not sleeping on maples, i know he has talent, my comment was due to the fact that he is a 6 year minor leaguer just making it to AA ball due to ineffectivness and injury.i hope wilson will become a player but not looking good now. if he is he is a top of the order guy. impact at the lead-off spot but he won't scare anyone. jiminez was being pitched around somewhat now.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Ernst:

    DLRobertson, there is more to evaluating players than looking at their batting averages. There are other ways that a player can add value. For instance, Schwarber, despite the low BA you indicate. His fWAR is about 2.1 for his career, his OPS is also above average. This DESPITE the low BA. Russell is similar. He has been a 3-4 fWAR player (solid starter) for 2 full seasons. Even if he doesn't match it this year he is still an outstanding value for his salary. They go about adding value differently. Schwarber is largely based on power and Russell is based on HR and defense. But both bring plenty of value to the table even with low BA.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    The Cubs did have waves (plural) of talent. In 2014 we brought up Alcantara, Hendricks, Soler, and Baez. In 2015 there was, of course, Bryant, Russell and Schwarber. In 2016 there was Contreras and Almora. In 2017 there was Happ. There are a couple of "impact bats" at the MLB level in that group as opposed to Single-A.

    I do agree that the Cubs need to re-stock their farm system in the next couple of years. But now they need to go for it for a couple years. And a young, controllable starter that we don't have to pay when he is 36 years old (like we would if we wanted to give up less or sign someone in FA) was too good an opportunity to pass up. It also removes Quintana from the market for other teams to acquire. While a minor point it can be important.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Some of the restocking will come from the 2015 IFA class as they mature. Restocking the farm will not be very easy going forward under the new CBA. The Cubs will be under a hard cap on IFAs next year. Also, comp picks falling after the 3rd round is a huge loss. It will be very hard to restock picking in the back off the draft with a smaller pool, hopefully. I'm not saying the Cubs should never trade prospects, but restocking the farm on a large market team that is good is going to be a very tall order

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Joel,I agree bop is important however,unless you are going to walk 4times in an inning which is unlikely, somebody at some point has to hit the baseball and .210 doesn't cut it. I do know how to evaluate, . I'm 58 now but when young ,I played 6 years of semi pro ball and was recruited to play d2 college ball although at that time chose not to do that as I didn't like the school and knew I wasn't going to play pro ball.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Joel Mayer:

    DLRobertson, I am not saying you lack knowledge or experience. And I did not say that Schwarber and Russell add value by their ability to draw BB. Schwarber has power and DESPITE a low batting average he has an above average OPS. You don't have to walk 4x in an inning. 2 doubles will do the trick. Or 1 HR.

    Russell, I pointed out, brings a lot of value on defense. Your comment said that they had BA that were too low. I only said that there are ways outside of BA to evaluate a player. I am sure you know them and I won't patronize you by lecturing you about them. I only want to point out that BA is a crude tool to evaluate someone.

    Also, as VERY young players Schwarber, Russell, etc. will more likely improve as they age rather than regress. It isn't impossible that their best years are behind them. It has happened. But it is exceedingly unlikely.

  • In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    "than you have given jimenez and cease away for 1 year of quintana not 3"

    Isn't that a risk with ANY trade? The point you missed is that, IF it happens, the Cubs aren't obligated to pay and can use the $$ somewhere else.

  • In reply to Randall Clark:

    Soler = reliable?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cliff1969:

    Lol again

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cliff1969:

    Hes 25 now? He's a bit of an enigma still but his prime is still a season or two away. His post season hitting, especially in 2015 was the closest thing ive seen to 04 Beltran

    God bless soler for sticking it to St louis

  • In reply to Randall Clark:

    The window is short my friend. With the salary flexability next year, they will go out and sign another arrieta type starter and have a very very good staff for the next 4-5 years.

    There are no guarantees. Over the recent years we have given up Donaldson lemehiue archer Torres Castro soler now Jimenez and cease and I may be wrong none of these organizations have won a world series with these players. Yet the cubs have. So let's keep it rolling. The window is short.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to bleachercreature:

    Don't forget Harrison and Bour from this year's All Star game and Chirinos.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jay Menadue:

    Bour was just in the Derby

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to bleachercreature:

    The window doesnt have to be short. The rest of the division is a complete and utter mess.
    Milwaukee is overachieving, stl and pitt are stuck in purgatory, and the reds are terrible.
    Big market teams can have much longer windows than 5 years

  • In reply to Randall Clark:

    Sorry Randal but your are clueless at best. The Castro deal was about freeing money to sign Zobrist and also open up spots for Baez and Happ. Castro never hit in the clutch for us at all. Look at his stats!!!! Yes he has been performing pretty good for the Yankees.
    The front office knows exactly what they are doing. We get a proven pitcher and we will open up spots and money for younger free agents.
    Thank God you know nothing about baseball at all!!!!!

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to cubbie forever:

    Be quiet w this narrative ; "The castro deal was about freeing up money" only. Please. I love how these billionaires have convinced us fans that they can't afford players when they make more money in 1 week then most of us will see in a life time. I love how they have some of the fans trained into feeling sorry for them when they have to spend a few million in a sport w no SALARY CAP.

    YES THE CUBS could have afforded Castro and Zobrist if they wanted to.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    Ok Mr.Know it all Then tell me where Baez and Happ play. Get real here, Castro was a major liablilty until he played 2nd base. Again no reply on his stats with us?????????

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to cubbie forever:

    See below. Also though schwarber likely doesnt get injured the same way if castro isnt dealt, lets assume he does.
    Zobrist Bryant Soler Heyward would have shared the corner outfield spots, with jhey spelling fowler in cf sometimes
    Bryant and baez split time at 3b (obviously kris is in the lineup as often as possible) baez castro and russell split time up the middle.
    Nothing really changes last year except less at bats for mediocre players like Lastella Coghlan Kawasaki and Szczur. It would have been great not seeing coghlan back lol.

    The vizcaino for la stella trade was also extremely regrettable. So the cubs rehabbed a guy who throws +100 for like 3 years then gave him back for what you get when ryan theriot has a baby with mike fontenot???

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to cubbie forever:

    Talk about his performance. Say you think he sucks. Say you think he's the worst player to ever put on a Cubs uniform. Fine, I won't argue w you because your entitled to your opinion. BUT please don't tell me we couldn't afford him and Zobrist.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    Also, ive been over this before on these boards, Castro had a relatively inexpensive contract. Jon Jay was signed to be a backup for about the same money Castro earned last year.
    Also what in the world is cubbieforever talking about? I remember at least 3 walkoff hits by Castro during his last season in Chicago. He had one of kimbrell early in the 2015 and 2 in as many days in June (maybe late May).
    Hating players just because they got traded is so 108 years ago.

  • In reply to Cubswin09:

    Darvish is a FA this year. We should be in position to make a serious bid on him. I also beleive Andrew Miller is a FA after this year(maybe next year, Im honestly not sure) but if he is, hes a pitcher we should seriously consider.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    Lets go get otani that would be fun.

  • In reply to bleachercreature:

    Let's go get a true lead-off hitter. Trade for Billy Hamilton from the Reds. I'd move Almora and prospects.

  • In reply to FairPole:

    Hamilton doesnt get on base enough. If he had a .350 obp hed steal 100 bases. wants to play power hitter when hes not one.

  • In reply to FairPole:

    I read that the Marlins were listening on Yelich. He'd be a pretty nice leadoff CFer, no?

  • In reply to bleachercreature:

    be careful on Otani. He just pitched his first game of the year in the NPL, hes had elbow issues so far and has been limited to DH duties(hes quite a hitter from what Ive read). If we are getting the 1995 Hideo Nomo Id look at himm but 2 years ago we went after Tanaka and the Stankees already are seeing him decline.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to mutant beast:

    If they signed Darvish, the Cubs would have a dominant rotation. They just need to resign Davis, or make a hell of a BP.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Wrigley0923:

    The thing is that, with retiring contracts to Lackey, Arrieta, Montero, Jay as well as possible non-tenders if the choose with Rondon and TLS there would be enough money to sign Darvish at something like $25M AAV and Davis at $15M AAV and still have some money left over to pay for arbitration increases. And those are just names off the top of my head.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    signing Darvish and Davis would make a nice offseason. Maybe a leadoff hitter that gets on base. Move Schwarber down to 6/7 in the lineup.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Cubs are cutting what $70m or sp in contracts this year with Montero, Arrieta Lackey gone and likely wont return Jay ? Darvish has no real competition on the market this year, He might at a minimum get a Lester type contract( i can see about 5/150 for him). Davis is an elite closer, so 3/45 would be realistic. Payroll would about where its at this year. How we look on any possible penalties?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to mutant beast:

    3 for 45 for Davis? I wish. I don't even think 4 years 70 million would be enough esp if he finished the season healthy and about this effective.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    Jenen and Chapman each signed for $16M AAV last off-season. I don't think Davis gets a bigger AAV than those two.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Another year and prices go up. Maybe he might not get much more then 16 AAV, but he won't get 3 for 45 or 4 for 60. Total dollars will be more.

    Jansen 5 years 80 million

    Chapman 5 years 86 million

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Fine. I didn't go into length of contract. I just listed $15M AAV.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Joel Mayer:

    I wasn't talking to you, I was talking mutant and then you threw in your 2 cents. Sorry.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to mutant beast:

    One of the important things is that the Cubs DON'T incur a luxury tax this year. They got one last year and they start getting larger as the "consecutive infractions" accumulate. That is why I think the team is being a little more careful this year. That and the whole "108 years" thing is done.

  • I agree with CubsWin that a deal for a reliever seems likely.

    Hate losing both those guys, especially Eloy, but Quintana is a great fit. Let's get this 2nd half rolling.

  • '"There's no such thing as a pitching prospect" (TNSTAAPP, for short) is actually a shorthand way of expressing the idea that minor-league pitchers are an unpredictable, unreliable subset of baseball players.'

    http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2197

  • In reply to Rob Richardson:

    Yes, and moreso as time goes on. Improved conditioning, nutrition, etc allows these guys to throw faster, but their arms are still human and don't seem to be able to handle the increased speed. Too many TJS and too many that aren't bouncing back.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Rob Richardson:

    Not only that but he is still a long way from being a MLB player. He has a ton of potential--and I like potential as much as anyone--but Quintana might well be Cease's ceiling.

  • I love this trade! A rotation of Lester, Hendricks, Quintana, Aretta, and Lackey or the piggyback of Montgomery/Butler(was really effective). Three nd half years of control with Q, the boys have outdone themselves.

  • Although this hurts, it follows the plan of going after position players with the ability to trade for pitching needs. We all have our opinions on which position players we prefer, but someone has to go to get any value in return.

  • In reply to Cphil:

    Agreed. Agreed, although Cease was pretty good SP prospect... I think this trade may sort of hurt if we can't resign Quintana but that's 3 & a half seasons from now. But we got our selves a legit ToR starter. Good trade.

  • This was always going to be the price tag if you want a good cost controlled pitcher. In fact, it probably is about a 10-20% discount if he was pitching a bit better. What I mean is I like Cease a lot, but actually think that he is a bit light as the second player I this kind of deal. He is super talented, but an injury risk, and probably projects more as a reliever than a starter. If the Sox tap into his full potential they will do well with this trade.

    One key note, many our saying that we traded our two top prospects, and we did... but going into the year Happ was #2 and we hung on to him. No matter what happens with Heyward, the OF is too crowded with Schwarber, and Happ (he is not a CF for long term) in the corners. In my mind if this deal goes down in March we may have had to give up Jimenez and Happ with a lesser pitcher than Cease. In that way I think we did ok.

    Overall I like the deal, this one we knew was coming, and we knew it would be painful, but to be honest I think it could have been worse so we did OK in getting that cost controlled reliable starter.

  • In reply to bleedblue:

    Agreed - Q is most likely the best SP option available this trading season from both a talent and contract perspective, and we weren't gonna get him for Cael Brockmeyer and Jose Rosario

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to bleedblue:

    Also saying this cost us our top 2 prospects is a little misleading. I know I have gotten used to the Cubs having a Top-5 system. That wasn't the case anymore. This isn't 2014 when trading our #1 and #2 would have meant Bryant and Russell or maybe Soler.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    except jiminez was ranked as anywhere between the 5-8 best prospect in the game. cease i could live with but there are,at this time, no potential impact bats in this system. some may get there but i can see this system being ranked in the low to mid twenties in the off-season. if the cubs continue to wet the bed in the next two weeks i wouldn't mind trying to use davis to get robles from the nats.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    First off, in my example both Bryant and Russell were TOP-5 on several lists.

    The Cubs don't need "impact bats." Right now and for the next couple years--ironically coinciding with Quintana's contract--they need pitching that is cost controlled/certain. Don't get me wrong, if we can make this deal WITHOUT trading either Jiminez and Cease I am all for it. But I am happy a guy in A-ball didn't prevent the Cubs from acquiring a guy that will keep them more competitive during their present, very real, competitive window.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    sorry joel, i disagee again, first not a- ball if you are talking jimenz. second who says they don't need impact bats. at this time in chicago you have swarber (misspelled) with a career .210 BA. he is probably better than that but do we know for sure. russell is a career .237 hitter. are we sure he will ever be what was projected. plus i would like to be competitive for 10-15 years, not five also, jimenez is 5-8 on every list. i don't think you could live on the difference between top five on every list.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    OK, he is in "Advanced A" or "High A" ball. I still consider that A-ball but if you want to make that distinction I will honor it.

    I am a little puzzled by your rationale. One the one hand you say that the Cubs players at the MLB level are not "impact" and question whether they will ever reach their potential ("are we sure he will ever be what was projected?"). The fact is that, no, we cannot be "sure" that any of them will be as good as projected. But we CAN be a good deal more confident than we can be about a player reaching his ceiling when he has had success at the MLB level for 2 seasons (3+ fWAR each year - Russell) than we can be about a guy in A+ ball. For scale Russell made his MLB debut when not much older than Jiminez is now.

    As for being competitive for 10-15 years I truly don't see this trade as truly affecting that. As I have said before if the Cubs are a better organization after a trade I am happy with it. I believe it is worth the risk to trade a player in High A ball and another in A-ball to get a player that fills a need.

    You want as many "impact" talents as possible. So do I. But not at the cost of the MLB team. I am OK with a trade that brings in a talent like Quintana. He fills a need. I think that the Cubs need a young, cost controlled Pitcher to give their young pitcher's time to develop MORE THAN they need another OF. I think the Cubs have players right now that are a safer bet to become "impact bats" than Jiminez "for the next 10-15 years."

    Finally, there is the economic side of this. Whether we like it or not the team does not have unlimited resources...or at least not likely to give unlimited resources. If that is the case then getting top flight production out of a pitcher for a lot less than market value can be really helpful. It allows the team to have the resources to sign an "impact" bat if they can't develop it.

    Finally, Quintana has had 5.1, 4.8, 4.8 fWAR the last 3 years and has 2 fWAR this year DESPITE unimpressive "triple crown" stats. That has ENORMOUS value on the open market if signing a FA. A good deal more than the ~$30-40M the Cubs will owe him if he plays out his contract.

    I made a lot of the same arguments you are making when the Cubs traded Torres last year for Chapman. I get it, I really do. But this is different because it is not a rental. We have this guy for 3+ years. If he can do 4.5-5.5 fWAR each year I am HAPPY to make that deal. and, no, 4.5-5.5 is not out of the realm of possibility this year, which most would agree has been an "off" year for him. Quintana's fWAR last year was 4.8. Sale was 5.2. Sale cost the Red Sox 2 Top-10 or Top-15 players. Moncada is a good deal closer to MLB (AAA as opposed to A+) ready than Jiminez and rated HIGHER by most lists I have seen. Kopech is a great deal higher than Cease.

    To me the only "risk" in this deal is if Eloy Jiminez reaches his full potential then the White Sox may have gotten a steal. But, short of that, the Cubs likely come out just fine in this. And if you are unsure if Russell and Schwarber et al. will reach their potential as "impact bats" I am not sure how you can be so confident that Jiminez can.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    I'd rather trade Addi then Eloy.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to bleedblue:

    I still want Torres back. I believe the Cubs would have won without Chapman. Maybe a lesser tade. Jmo.

  • In reply to Wrigley0923:

    You willing to go back in time and make that gamble? Cubs won the WS for the first time in 108 years. Whatever it took I'm glad we did it.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Lildude:

    I'm just saying we still had Torres. But that's the past, maybe we'll get him back eventually

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Wrigley0923:

    I am in your boat but it is pointless to argue counterfactuals ("what if...").

  • In reply to Wrigley0923:

    They would have won without Chapman. We're you asleep the second half of the season ???????? Really

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to cubbie forever:

    Maddon overused Chapman. Everyone knows that. Especially in the playoffs. YES I'd rather a ring over Torres. Maybe the overuse of Chapman in the playoffs is why I didn't like the trade. Chapman wasn't lights out either. Especially after 1 inng.

  • fb_avatar

    Oh my gosh!!!! I have never questioned this FO but this team is awful right now I can't see how this is going to help. Quintana is not going to help every position player start to hit or the bullpen not suck or the other 4 starters to get their ERA's below 4. Sick to my stomach over this trade. Why not do something in the off season when the price should be lower? I really hope it works out but I just don't see it.

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    Cuz in the offseason the Brewers would most likely not have been interested in trading Quintana to us

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Lildude:

    So what. There are no other 4-8 with a 4.49 era cost controlled pitchers out there? The price is way to high especially since Quintana is a dumpster fire this season. This is like paying a 30 year old running back based on past performance. Let the Brewers trade for him. If the Cubs were playing anywhere near their potential we'd have a 6 game lead on the Brewers. There nowhere near the Cubs in talent.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Brandon Halford:

    He is having a bad year. But this looks like an outlier season. He had a couple REALLY bad starts in Apr-May but since the beginning of June his numbers look considerably better with a ERA of 2.70, FIP of 3.4 and xFIP of 3.52 (W-L record is not a good way to evaluate a pitcher, especially playing on a bad team). His BABIP isn't particularly low, his HR/FB rate and LOB% isn't outlandish so there doesn't look to be anything particularly suspect about his numbers.

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    And no pitcher in recorded history ever had a better second half of the season? Especially after getting traded? Seriously - you can't see how adding a solid #2-3 lefty SP is going to help this team?

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    Good point.
    If Quintana pitches like Sutcliffe did after the trade in 1984 then it'll look like the Cubs got a steal.

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    Doyle Alexander, anybody? went 9-0 after being traded by Atlanta to Detroit in 1987 and the guy whom Atlanta got for him? Only a HOF pitcher named John Smoltz, then a AA prospect.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    good analogy

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to mutant beast:

    Doyle Alexander was an aging player at the end of his career. Quintana is in his prime.

    But also, consider this, if it was COMMON for minor leaguers to become HOF when traded then we wouldn't remember the Lou Brocks, the John Smoltz, the Jeff Bagwell's of the world. We can't refuse to trade minor leaguers just because they might become a HOF.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cliff1969:

    Not for 4 prospects including our top 2 prospects and a top 5 overall prospect. This isn't Chris Sale for pete sake. Maybe Adrian Petersen is going to rush for 2000 yards this season, maybe Quintana will have a better second half, maybe the Cubs will hit, maybe Maddon will quit screwing with the lineup so the players can have some consistency, maybe the bullpen will suddenly not suck, maybe Arrietta will make up his lost velocity, maybe Lester will learn to pitch to any catcher that's not retired, maybe maybe maybe. Starting pitching is only one of 4 problems with this team. What happens when Hayward (hopefully) opts out of his contract next season? Or what if Swarbs decides he's not really a MLB hitter because we know he's not an MLB defender. Suddenly we have 2 holes in the outfield we could have filled with a top 5 prospect. I love the Cubs and Theo but what happened to the fix must come from within? I hope next season I am eating my words but to me this trade is leveraging the future for a team that is going to finish the season at .500.

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    You realize Quintana is under contract through 2020 at incredible value, right?

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    Geezus, dude. Go follow the White Sox then and quit making Cubs fans look like sissy whiners?

    Yes the Cubs are not playing up to their potential this year and may have sipped too much champagne in the off season. Try to keep some composure as they professionals, and world champions may I remind you, prove their worth in the second half.

    Quintana was the highest sought after SP this off season then had a rough start. He is in his late 20's, i.e. his prime not on the decline. It is actually the best time to buy low for him. I still believe the Cubs have the best core of position players in the game. Dealing two single A players, as good as we had hoped they will be, has no impact on our window to win additional championships.

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    I don't look at this trade as a trade just for this year we had a big issue with our SP after this season and teams don't trade SP in the offseason as much as the deadline it's a quieter market. You don't know if pitchers like darvish will even reach Free agency and if the top SPs resigned how are we supposed to address the rotation?

    This trade is as much about the next few years as this year. Kudos to theo for understanding that and not setting the market again

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    I've been scrolling down and reading everyone's comments and can only make it to this point. I can't believe all of this negativity and whining that I'm reading. I understand some people's frustration losing a top prospect in a trade. But last I checked, we won a world series with this fo. This fo built this club from a bottomless pit and won a world series. I can't believe how blind some are to this fact. All of a sudden a couple of trades are made and the fo office has no clue. What a joke! You guys are sounding like the uninformed cubs fans I'm used to, and that's just sad.

  • In reply to Almost Rich:

    This FO is one of the best in the MLB, but they didn't take over a team bereft of talent. Baez, Contreras were from the previous FO. LaMahieu was also from the previous FO. This FO has made good trades, but to say that every trade made is amazing is also not true. All the complaints here I've seen have been mostly about concerns about the lack of talent in the farm system now. Having a bottom 5 system is a real concern. Most of the complaints have well thought out reasons why they don't like the trade. Those that do like it also have made good arguements for why it is a good trade.

  • In reply to Bamacub:

    My complaint is he is a mid rotation guy. Not a ace of a staff.

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    Any time you trade prospects, there's a chance you are "leveraging the future." But you can play the "maybe, maybe, maybe" game with Eloy and Cease just as easily.

    The better the prospects, the more people will be upset when they are traded.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Brandon Halford:

    Quintana:

    - Eats innings
    - Has the 7th best WAR in baseball for a SP over the past 4 seasons

    So while I appreciate he is 4-8 with a 4.49 ERA this year, I don't think that is indicative of the type of player he has been historically (consider that since a rough start to the year he's been at 2.70 ERA with other solid metrics for the past 2 months). If you think there is a better proven commodity who will cost the team only 8.5MM next year, I'm all ears. Consider the Cubs are paying Jake and Lackey each well over 10MM this year. And take a look at the crop of FA pitchers next year and advise who on that list just makes you salivate for a long term deal at a high price tag.

    In short, the Cubs got themselves a reliable, cost controlled pitcher for up to 3.5 seasons who is 28 years old. Those pitchers are not readily available and they cost you value.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Dave Sampsell:

    I believe Arrieta and Lackey are making >$15M.

  • In reply to Dave Sampsell:

    Why has he been on so many pro teams????

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    I'm betting the FO isn't done. I think there's another deal or 2 coming down.

  • In reply to Milk Stout:

    Yes. Candelario is likely gone, unless they move Bryant to the OF.

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    If they move Bryant to the OF, are they resigning Schwarb to the bench?

  • In reply to awfullyquiet:

    Maybe he'll pitch or play SS, or sell peanuts, but I'm not laying out all the possible lineup configurations. All I'm saying is that Candelario has no place to play unless they trade Bryant or move him to another position (or he goes on the DL). He (Candelario) has more value to the Cubs as a trade piece than as a player on the MLB roster.

  • In reply to Milk Stout:

    Schwarber for Norris & Avila is my guess. I kept reading that Norris has the potential to be Kershaw-lite but has yet to put it together. Avila is a rental that I don't think they could resign but would be a nice supplement to Contreras for the rest of the year.

  • In reply to Milk Stout:

    I agree with this.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to TheCHISportsFan:

    I think they are going to get another elite BP piitcher. They're just waiting for the right deal.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Brandon Halford:

    I will take your reasoning and say it actually shows why this is a GOOD trade.

    To me the FO is being opportunistic this year. Quintana is NOT a "rental." This would be a good deal if the Cubs DO decide to be "sellers" at the deadline. There has been (justifiably) hand-wringing about how much the Cubs would have to pay to replace as many as 3 spots in their rotation this off-season. They might have some in-house options for a BOR spot but replacing Arrieta and Lackey wasn't going to be cheap, even with both having inconsistent (at best) seasons. As Michael points out it gives the Cubs a solid #1-3 for the next couple years at very reasonable rates. Filling a #4-5 spot is a good deal cheaper than paying market rates for a guy that you want as a #2-3. Like $15M AAV for 5+ years cheaper. And those 5 years may well include years in their mid-late 30's.

    He has an extraordinarily cheap contract for the next couple of years. We are getting a #2-3 starter for #4 prices. And the salary increase as you go to the TOR starters over the BOR starters is NOT linear but, rather, geometric/exponential.

    So, if it helps, don't look at this as the first move of a "buy" deadline strategy but, instead, the first move of preparation for 2018. It prevents good pitchers from approaching the Cubs this off-season and saying, "You guys need help at the middle/top of your rotation. here is my rate. Call me." The Cubs can still sign someone. As I mention above and Michael outlined very well Quintana's contract is outstanding.

    My guess is that the Cubs were talking to OAK and TB about Gray and Archer. They picked the deal they thought fit their needs best for the cost. We don't know what TB and OAK were asking but I speculate it was AT LEAST as high and possibly higher (like including significant MLB players such as Baez or Happ). That is just speculation on my part but I would be truly surprised if the Cubs didn't pull the trigger on the deal that they felt made their team better now and in the future.

    Yes, this one hurt the farm system. Theo said that at some point in the near future they would have to tap into their minor leagues to help their pitching staff. And it was going to hurt. And this one did. But for what we got it didn't hurt as much as I expected.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Joel Mayer:

    You're logic is very sound. I just disagree on the type of player Quintana is. I hope I am wrong!

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Brandon Halford:

    On what basis are you holding that belief? What other option could the team reasonably pursue that provides as much value in terms of years, cost and ability (look at his stats the last four years)? Seriously, I'd like to know what else you'd reasonably expect to get.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Dave Sampsell:

    This starts getting into things that we, as fans, have no way of knowing. The three main candidates I have heard also come with impressive years of control (Sonny Gray and Chris Archer). There are a couple of different scenarios:
    1. The Cubs offered the A's and the Rays the same deal and both declined. That would, effectively set a "ceiling" on that package's "value."
    2. The A's, Rays and Sox all agreed to that (or similar) package and the Cubs decided they wanted Quintana more than the other two.
    3. The Cubs were not ever interested in Archer/Gray for whatever reason (I am not going to go that far into speculation at this point). They targeted Quintana and decided he was worth the price.

    I think #3 is highly unlikely, but not impossible. The point is that they surely put a lot of thought into this. As others have pointed out, we can't look at this as a "Let's improve the 2017 team" trade, or a least not exclusively. It will be a trade that will put the team in a much better position this off-season and next year. Somewhat like Mike Montgomery. When the Cubs acquired him NO ONE said, "Now we have our guy to get the last out of the WS!" Instead people focused on his ability and that he was under team control for a good length of time.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Brandon Halford:

    There is nothing wrong w our bullpen this year. The numbers would disagree w you as well. Considering how many innings they have thrown because of our shitty starting pitching length, ( Quintana will help this) they have done an excellent job.

    You must be watching another team.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Brandon Halford:

    Don't even trip potato chip. We will be signing Bryce Harper in one and half years !

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    I hope so! I have a bad feeling he's going to be wearing Satan's pins strips though!

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    Maybe not. Yankees OF is where most of there best youngsters are at , save for Torres, Stealing Frazier from the Indians didnt hurt. Machado is a FA next year and hes a better fit there. LAD might just sign him because they have the $.

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    this deal isnt just for this year.

  • In reply to Brandon Halford:

    Actually, to your points, a reliable 2/3 starter can take pressure off young players in the lineup to win every game. And, Q bumps down 2 if not 3 other starters down a slot, effectively reducing some pressure off those guys. And solid innings help make the bullpen more effective.

    We know this team can play D, we know they can rake, and following the Cubs Way is an advantage in offensive approach as long as the sticks are disciplined. This was exactly the piece the team needs to stop pressing so much and get back to the way they can perform.

  • I really like the trade. I could see the Cubs trading Wade Davis for a couple top #100 prospects and then package them with Schwarber, Eddie Butler, and Candelario for Fullmer in Detroit. I know it hurts the bull pen some, but I think Edwards can close, Montgomery can go back to relief work and it sets up Cubs really well the next three years. Am I way off?

  • In reply to David23:

    Why would you trade Davis now???

  • In reply to WaitTilNextYear:

    Good question. It is a risk because Davis is a good closer, but maybe worth it because I think Edwards can fill that role just as well and Montgomery also can slide into the bullpen. Plus the return in my suggested trade is getting Fullmer, a better pitcher than Quintana, in my opinion. Yes, it may hurt in short term (this year), but man the Cubs would be really set in their rotation for the next three years.

  • In reply to David23:

    Fullmer is a 15-18 game winner in the NL if he stays healthy. Fullmer would be worth the gamble of given up Eloy and Cease, In my opinion Quitana is an overpay. If there guys pan out, the White Sux will be Chicagos winners in 2-3 years. There minor league system right now looks like ours did in 2014.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to mutant beast:

    That is true. They will be VERY good in 3-4 years. And at that point we will see what happens. There might be a Chicago WS. How bad would that be? To me Quintana is not an overpay. Getting his kind of talent in the off-season as a FA would have been expensive. And acquiring someone better (talent + contract) would have been even more expensive.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Joel until the Cubs find a leadoff hitter to get on in front of KB and Riz the offense will struggle. Biggest single difference in our O this year compared to last is No Dexter Fowler .

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    No, the biggest single difference is basically every offensive player under-performing. Fowler is missed but that is not the main reason for the struggles.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Eric:

    Well, yes, there's that too. Add onto that all the starting pitchers having more difficulty and suddenly this year's struggles come into focus.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    joel, the 'stros with a young talented MLB lineup and a loaded-with-potential impact player farm system, a system with a much better ranking than the cubs now. could have had him in the spring giving them this full year as well as the other thee years and with a pitching need as great as the cubs, wouldn't give up what the sox were asking for someone who is a 2-3 starter. they could afford the prospect price better than the cubs and weren't giving up the5-8 best prospect in baseball to do it.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    And things haven't changed since the beginning of the season? The Cubs proably thought they would be AHEAD in the division by at least 5.5, not trailing and below .500. As for the Astros they have Keuchel and McCullers scheduled to be starters as well as a solid group backing them. Besides, it really doesn't look like the Astros need a young, cost-controlled starting pitcher as much as the Cubs.

    Look, each team is in a different position. The Astros have 2 top 50 prospects as pitchers at AAA. They are sitting far better in that regard than the Cubs. Also, the price for Quintana may well have changed. We don't know what the Sox were asking at the beginning of the year. With his struggles the price may have come down, or the market may have evaporated. It happens.

    We can speculate all you want on what deals didn't happen. But is it largely a fruitless exercise.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    my point is the astros percieved a real need but didn't think it was worth the cost. mlb trade rumors had the sox asking for marte,tucker , and a couple others.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    by the way joel, one thing i have always liked about cubs den and i have been on since the rebuilding years. we can disagree on this but unlike other sites. we keep it civil if you know what i mean.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Joel Mayer:

    DL, Sorry if I am coming on a bit strong on this. I don't mean any disrespect to you or your views.

    I am truly enjoying the conversation with you. I like that, as far as I can tell, the "sternest" thing you've said is, "I disagree with you." That is a statement of fact and we can discuss it...like civilized human beings.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    but it would only be money joel not one of the best prospects in baseball.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    And a draft pick most likely.

    But my problem lies in that I LOVE prospects as much as anyone. I was honestly depressed when the Cubs traded Torres last year. Micheal, John and others have had to "talk me down" when we released a pitcher as promising as Jonathan Martinez (not sure why I was so irritated by that, but Michael pointed out he just wasn't going to get the innings to develop because, no, he wasn't promising). Obviously Eloy is FAR better than Martinez but he is also still a minor leaguer; Still low in the minors as well. It is not uncommon for VERY promising players in the low minor leagues to never quite "figure it out." Evaluators are getting much better at spotting flaws that previous generations missed but there is still a HUGE gauntlet for Jiminez to run through.

    To me BOTH sides are taking a gamble on this. The White Sox are risking trading away a valuable commodity (a good, cost-controlled starting pitcher) for a couple lottery tickets. These lottery tickets have a better chance of succeeding than other lottery tickets, but they still need things to fall into place. And there are a lot of things that can de-rail them. The Cubs had to pay a high price because the "risk" the White Sox are taking is greater than the risk the Cubs are taking. The Cubs have a more certain/stable commodity in this deal.

    The risk the Cubs are taking is different. They are risking "regret." And maybe not even that. The worst-case scenario for them is that this becomes Archer-for-Garza or something like that (to me it is highly unlikely to become Garland-for-Karchner). Where we traded away a young player who, relatively quickly, became a good deal better than the guy we acquired.

    I am guessing that the Cubs reasoning comes down to something like this:
    We are a very good team that is underperforming. Our salaries are going to start increasing in the near future as Baez, Bryant, Russell begin entering their arbitration and FA years. We have struggled to develop middle-top pitching talent. And paying for it on the open market is very expensive. We have plenty of options for the OF so we can afford to trade away a prospect there to give us a commodity that we lack. We also had to add a pitcher with talent but has a checkered injury history and may not be ready in time to coincide with our window. In short, these guys, as valuable as they are, might be more valuable to other teams. And Quintana is more valuable to us than Jiminez, Cease and 2 other "throw-ins."

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    it looks better. 9 players in the top 100. i think the cubs topped out a 6. that includes the number 1 (moncada) and number 5-8 depending on who is evaluating (eloy) and luis robert 2nd highest bonus in history behind moncada. they have pitching and position players.

  • In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    to me the key guys in there entire system are Golioto and Kopech, theyd give the Sox 2 TOR caliber pitchers. WS are going to be scary good in 2-4 years, and still young.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    i told my brother today, in 2-3 years the sox, not the cubs, will be the dominant team in chicago, ironically, using the cubs formula.

  • In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    Then we'll hear everyone clamoring for a crosstown WS. I HATE that idea.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    The whitesox are way more loaded then we ever were. They also have both pitching and hitting prospects.

    John liked to say " The Cubs have waves and waves of talent"

    "The white sox really have waves and waves of talent"

    They have studs at all the levels. If they add some closer to the bigs prospects at the deadline and some shrewd signing this winer, they are on there way. They are going to start competing for a wild card as early as next year. 2019, they could be the favorites to win the AL Central.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    Yes they do. They are going to be real scary in 2-3 years, even more so if there pitching porspects stay healthy. Kopech has been a beast so fat this year.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    The Royals had 9 in the top 100 about 10 years ago, and the majority of them flamed out. You still never know.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Winter:

    "Prospects will break your heart."

  • In reply to John Winter:

    Mike Montgomery was one of them.

  • In reply to John Winter:

    Joel, Since both the Royals and Cubs both won the WS based on having a number of those guys make it as well I think we can say that in this case having a ton of prospects can heal a broken heart too.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    they have their future closer in charlette (aaa) in burdi.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to WaitTilNextYear:

    If they fall further behind the next two weeks you might trade him because you aren't making the playoffs and he's going to be a FA. Let's say they are 8.5 or 9 games out on July 30th.

  • In reply to Dave Sampsell:

    My question was why you trade him now. I get if 10 games out July 31st but not now.

  • In reply to WaitTilNextYear:

    Bc the package he can bring back is worth more than his services to us this year. I was positive theo would acquire a cost controlled SP but to do that it costs prospects. Although I agree with the trade we have nothing in the farm system now. Trading Davis helps replenish our system and it turns short term to long term assets. We may need those assets when another need arises next year or in the future. I'd trade Davis and acquire a cheaper cost controlled reliever even after this trade. I think just acquiring Quintana makes us a playoff contender again but by trading Davis were not all in this year were balancing the need to win now while keeping the big picture in mind.

    I said it before don't be surprised if theo makes 3-4 trade by be deadline. I can see him trading Davis but at the same time acquiring a cheaper cost controlled RP, maybe a leadoff hitter, and maybe a C. This allows us to take advantage of Davis peaking value by adding an impact prospect that we need now while at the same time not throwing away this season

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    If they are trying to make a run this year they will not trade Davis. If Davis is traded they have thrown in the towel on this season.

  • In reply to David23:

    I'm guessing they offered this package for Fulmer and got shot down. Why woul Detroit want MLB pitcher players? They won't contend again for years and years.

  • In reply to TC154:

    I suggested Butler because he is still young and has first round pedigree with potential to really develop still. I thought the Tigers would want someone in their rotation to replace Fullmer.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to David23:

    Butler is the kind of guy that teams want when they trade someone like Fullmer. The Cubs aren't going to hesitate to include him in a deal. He is MLB ready. He still has some talent and could still improve. But they would have someone to plug into their rotation to fill the spot vacated by Fullmer. Then the real upside to the deal is having Schwarber and Candelario. Butler amounts to a really good throw in.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    That was my thinking. I do think, though, if it was just Scwharber, Candelario and Butler, Detroit wouldn't do it. However, if they trade Davis and get two good prospects to include in the trade then maybe Detroit says yes.

    Just having some fun...

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to David23:

    I can imagine a scenario where they do the trade. It really depends on what others offer them. It is very hard for us, as fans, to know what has been offered.

    For instance, it is possible that the Cubs had deals in place using roughly the same guys with OAK (for Gray) and TB (for Archer) and CHOSE Quintana. I don't think they made this trade because Quintana had the best 1st half.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to TC154:

    I bet they offered Cease and Eloy to TB for Archer, Detroit for Fulmer, and sox for Quintana.

    Sox the only ones who said YES.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    Very possibly.

  • In reply to David23:

    Davis would be a rental. No way Detroit is giving up there de facto ace at 24 yo for a 2 month rental who likely will be on the market after the season. Cubs would be better off to keep Davis at a 3/36 or so salary for 3 yrs or so.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to mutant beast:

    What David23 was suggesting was that the Cubs trade Davis to WAS (not DET) and get a couple really good prospects back (presumably including Robles). Then turn around and trade them to DET (essentially making it a 3-team deal...sort of) along with Butler, Schwarber, and Candelario and for Fulmer. While you could argue that DET would require more than that he wasn't actually suggesting trading Davis for Fulmer.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    Maybe I need to be more clear. Cubs trade Davis to anyone in need (i.e. Washington) for a couple good prospects (probably not as good as the Chapman trade, but a very good closer like Davis will get a nice return). Whatever they get from that trade is shipped to Detroit along with Schwarber, Butler and Candelario. The result is the Cubs get Fullmer who is excellent and very young and Detroit gets Schwarber, Butler (potential to still develop), Candelario and the two good prospects from the Davis trade.

    This may hurt the Cubs some this year, but the next three years barring no major injuries, they'll really be set in the rotation. As mentioned earlier, Edwards can close, Montgomery can go back to bull pen. Again, this may not be a good move; it is why I asked. I'm willing to make a risk like this because it sets up the starting rotation really well the following years and they still may be able to cover for Davis no longer being with them.

    Bottom line, if they want to get a pitcher like Fullmer or Archer they'll need to trade everyday major league talent and prospects. They don't have many top prospects anymore, so a Davis trade makes that happen.

  • In reply to David23:

    I think you were clear. Seems to me that unloading their closer AND getting a starter like Fullmer or Archer are counterproductive moves, at least in the same year. Even if Edwards turns out to be a closer (I have my doubts) they're back to relying on Strop and Rondon to get them to the closer.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cliff1969:

    But it isn't trading a closer and just acquiring a SP. First off, I value a SP more than I would a closer. Also, SP with #1-3 stuff are usually more expensive than closers, even the elite ones like Chapman and Jensen.

  • In reply to David23:

    IF Detroit were to make that trade I can see your point. Fullmer would have to stay healthy, and so would our core position players. One thing Quintana and Fullmer can both do is lessen the strain on the bullpen, they both are 200IP plus type pitchers. and both certainly will benefit from a move to the NL. Im just not sure how much I like Edwards as closer yet.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    Fullmer has never pitched 200+inning. But, he does look like a good pitcher with my untrained eyes.

  • In reply to David23:

    my thought as well (washington) for a package including robles but i'm not flipping him. i also think you could get a package as good as the chapman package or better. wahington's bullpen is awful. that is their only weakness. if you added ueahara( yeh, i know misspelled) to really sweeten the deal you might get a tremendous package. the nats are desparate to win and that would fix their only weakness.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    I could get on board with trading a couple of relief pitchers in their walk year to WAS to bring back some solid talent for the farm system. I am concerned that this year the Cubs won't be able to catch up with the Brewers, even with Quintana. The Brewers have been playing over their heads, but they have built a decent lead and the Cubs haven't shown any real consistency so far. And the WC is coming out of the NL West I am pretty sure. Let the Nats deal with trading solid prospects for a rental (or two). I am fine with that. And the playoffs are such a "crap shoot" anyway I would do that trade.

  • In reply to David23:

    You'd have to be really confident that Edwards can close in order to trade Davis. I'm not sure he's ready, especially when he comes in with runners on.

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    Yes, I agree and that is the big risk, but I don't see it as a one year trial to see if the risk plays out. The Cubs would actually have four post seasons, I think, to win another title or two with Fullmer in their rotation. This is why I'd consider this risk. Your point is well taken, though.

  • In reply to David23:

    Interesting proposal.

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    I'd rather see if Edwards can close this year if he's going to be the closer next year. The team now has very little if any trade capital to trade next year if they suffer an injury or Edwards proves he can't close. If the team continues to struggle coming out of the break I think they really have to sell to get some prospects back in expiring deals to not be stuck like the Angles have been, where they lack prospects to improve their team in trades

  • In reply to Bamacub:

    My idea is to acquire a cost controlled RP that isn't necessarily an ace RP like Davis. That wouldn't cost you an impact prospect so we'd presumably get the impact prospect that our system badly needs now while also converting short term to long term assets. This scenario also doesn't throw away this season while at the same time respecting the big picture approach

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    My scenario included trading Davis bc I think if we can get s Robles like impact prospect it would be irresponsible on our FOs part to pass on that given our depleted system

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    I would try to acquire any additional help bc I want to see what guys like Johnson, Davis , Zastrynsky, Maples, & Edwards at closer can do. That way if their success doesn't translate you can make adjustments in the offseason. Going into 2018 with those guys is way to risky bc if they can't get the job done you are stuck bc they don't really have the resources to acquire a closer at the deadline with their farm., unless they use someone off the 25 man. I'd rather see how they handle those roles this year then next so you can have a backup plan

  • In reply to Cliff1969:

    Not really. Montgomery did close out Game 7. Just sayin'.....,

  • That explains why Eloy Rose and Flete were not in the MB line up last night. I have very big mixed feelings on the trade. It stings knowing we gave up a top 5 prospect and our best arm too. A great deal for the Sox. I was hoping that getting Hendricks back would fill the void of starting pitching.
    My main concern is the system is fairly dry now. I like having a insurance plan for Almora swarbs happ and even jason. I just hope it works.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to WaitTilNextYear:

    Don't worry. Bryce Harper is coming over in a year and a half.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    Just in time for Riz and KB to leave shortly thereafter. No way we can pay all 3 and Harper is the next Stanton/Kershaw contract. Miami is already putting out feelers about Stanton.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to mutant beast:

    Have you been to Wrigley lately? The Ricketts have more money then we could dream of. I wouldn't be surprised that they are going to have to build a money vault like scrooge mcduck to hold all the cash they are generating.

    The real genius of their ownership reign is how they can get hard working Americans to feel sorry for them and worrying about their finances.. They are F'n Brilliant ! Don't ever ever ever feel sorry for the billionaires.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    The thing about business is that it's easy to assume that expensive stuff = business success. I'm not feeling sorry for the Ricketts at all, but they got successful by being smart with their money. I don't expect that to change.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    Not to mention a new TV contract coming up.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    No way he comes to Chicago. If Bryant and Harper play together it will be in LA closer to home.

  • In reply to WaitTilNextYear:

    This is my feeling as well. Trade wasn't awful, I just hate losing the backup for help in the farm system through trades/callups. It's not so much trading the top prospects, its that Jimenez was the only guy left in the system with a high ceiling. I still think Cease ends up in the BP long term, so I'm not sweating him to much. Jimenez seemed to be injured a big much also, so I was a little worried he'd end up like Soler where he could never remain healthy for a full season. I still think they should explore the market to see what kind of returns their expiring contracts could bring to restock the farm. I really hate having a bottom 5 farm system bc it limits you in moves you can make.

  • Is alzolay a projected starter or reliever? I'll feel better about this trade if alzolay is projected to be a starter because he could be up late 2018.

  • In reply to bolla:

    Starter. Not a sure thing. They haven't built him up beyond about 90 pitches, but he has everything he needs to hold up there.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Ernst:

    He also has plenty of time.

  • In reply to bolla:

    right now hes a starter.

  • Say it ain't so!!! Eloy and Cease for Quintana (4-8, 4.49 ERA and 14 HRs in 18 starts)..with Rose and Flete thrown in? Not a fan of this trade. If you are going to give up that much talent, you need to come away with a front line starter. Not someone to simply replace John Lackey next year. This feels like more of a Gar/Pax move than a move Epstein makes. I guess this makes it easier on who to protect this year on the rule 5 draft....does it really matter who we lose this year? Everyone else is replaceable in the minors. Time to rebuild the minors again...

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to CubsFaninNC:

    Don't worry buddy. Bryce Harper will be in Chicago by the time Eloy will be sniffing at the MLB roster ( if he makes it)

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    IMO Bryce Harper is not coming to the Cubs.

  • WHOA! That's a bold move!

  • Glad to have Adbert Alzolay over Cease – IF it came down to which pitcher had to be included to make this deal happen. You never know how the future will play out especially for pitchers.

  • In reply to CubFanStuckInStl:

    I agree. Cease is more talented but I'd take Alzolay, Albertos, & even De la Cruz over Cease at this point. Cease was like a high end car that you could only occasionally drive. I didn't really see him being able to hold up in the rotation. I think he's better suited as a closer or Andrew Miller type reliever. While there is value there, the Cubs need SP to fill out the top end of the rotation. The only hard part of this trade is losing Jimenez bc I think he is a really special talent. With the way Russell & Baez have progressed this year I wonder if the FO is regretting including Torres instead of Jimenez now. I know I'd rather have Torres & have traded Russell for Quintana

  • What's next? Schwarber for Fulmer?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to markw:

    If they were able to pull that off. This team becomes the scariest team in baseball, because we know this offense is going to hit eventually.

  • In reply to markw:

    Yankees would gladly take Schwarber.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    Sorry, I'm not up on the Yankee roster--who would come to the Cubs? Or do you speak with tongue in cheek?

  • In reply to markw:

    actually, I dont. Yankees actually were willing to trade Andrew Miller straight up for Schwarber last year. Id start by asking for Severino and Betances.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    The Yankees needs are similar to the Cubs. They need young cost controlled starters (if Tanaka opts out, they currently have 2 starters for next year (Severino and Montgomery) and BP help (Clippard has fallen off a cliff). + 1st base. Severino has #1 starter potential and Betances is arguably the best reliever in the game. As good as the short RF porch would look for Schwarber there is no way that those 2 would be on the table for him. If you believe he is a LF then they have tons of OFs. He would be a DH in NY. Candelairio could be a good fit for them with first base being terrible because of Bird's injury and Headley at third being meh. Even then they have Torreyes who takes time at third. Yankee's farm is still absolutely loaded even after graduating so many players this year. It's just difficult to find a big trade that helps both teams this season.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to mutant beast:

    Betances was the first name that popped in my head too.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    "Yankees would gladly take Schwarber"

    Maybe we could get that Adam Warren guy. I hear he's pretty good.

  • I HATE this trade. While Quintana is a nice starter and certainly will improve us this year, we could have done this and likely have kept either Cease or Jiminez. Giving up one of them I can understand . Not both, Quitana is not a TOR pitcher, and trading your best prospects for a 2/3 pitcher is foolish.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    haha, could have been done and kept those guys... sure... I bet Theo never thought of trying to give up as little as possible! GREAT INSIGHT!

  • In reply to PattersontoPie:

    ChristianP?

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    I did kind of miss ChristianP. He was always there to kind of balance me out when I'd creep toward the ledge. Reading his posts would make me convince myself the team was going to be OK

  • In reply to Bamacub:

    Simmons replaced him

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Wickdipper:

    Do we know that they are not the same person?

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    Maybe ChristianP Jr.

  • fb_avatar

    This is huge that they jumped the market and got him way before the deadline.

    1. We don't get into an even bigger bidding war.

    2. We get about 3 extra starts from him

    Very smart move. Front office is backing this team up. Now it's time for the team to do its talking on the field.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    I think you're on to something important. Can't let this young and still very talented team get the idea that the FO would just quit on them mid-season.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    and #3

    JQ has gone 6-1 with a 2.70 ERA since June 1?

    Boys, we are getting a HOT pitcher. Run him out there tomorrow night!

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to KJRyno:

    Bingo ! Add in a great defense behind him, jumping into a pennant race, and facing a lot of hitters who have never seen him.

    Thats a recipe for success for the Cubs. Now just need to bats to wake up.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    The AL has the DH he had to face. The white sox defense is terrible. Getting better defense and not having to face a DH, his ERA should improve.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    VERY important that they struck first......yes!

  • Re top prospects. I just looked up Gleyber Torres:

    Jun 22, 2017 ... Gleyber Torres is out for the season after undergoing Tommy John surgery on his left elbow, so he already has turned his attention to 2018.

    The Yankees were thinking of him for next year. Building a team is tricky.

  • In reply to markw:

    Stankees might move Castro to 3b next year to accomodate Gleyber. Before he got hurt, Torres was doing well enough the Yankees were seriuosly considering bringing him up to the big club when they put Casro on the DL 3 weeks ago.

  • In reply to markw:

    It was his non-throwing elbow. He is expected back for ST next year.

  • White Sox fans should be ecstatic that they turned 3 MLB players into a super stocked farm system that had little-to-no top tier talent at the end of the 2016 season.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to CubFanStuckInStl:

    They should be. Just because they are ecstatic doesn't mean the guys they traded away weren't worth it. Each team is just at a different point in their "contention window."

  • Can't look at this in isolation, we need context.

    Quintana through 2020 for two good yet far away prospects is not a bad deal by any standard.

    The Cubs will also be able to deal their established MLB players for high quality prospects as they start to become more expensive.

    Overall, well done, Theo/Jed.

  • Lots of talk about 2018-19, but there could well be some improvement in 2017. Adding Q could be a shot in the arm for both hitters and other starting pitchers - maybe bullpen too, if they don't have as big a load to carry down the stretch. It would be great if Jake could return to being Jake, too.

  • Maybe it's because it's the white sox and their fans are acting like they fleeced the cubs that irritates me.If quintana played for any team besides the white sox and this trade happened I wouldn't even care.It's still an overpay but the Cubs need starting pitching so I can accept it

  • In reply to bolla:

    It's not an overpay though. Of the available SP, Quintana is the best. Everyone saying he isn't a TOR pitcher is underrating him. He's been a top 10 pitcher in baseball for 2.5 years now.
    The Cubs gave up a stud 20 year old hitter and a really nice 20 year old SP who will more likely than not be a big league closer.

  • In reply to Kramerica20:

    I think Quintana is an ace and it seems Theo and Jed think so too. I trust this FO. They know what they are doing. They are putting the odds in our favor. There are no guarantees with trades but the odds are in our favor.

  • I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs still make another trade with someone on the roster now; maybe just before the deadline.

  • In reply to Cphil:

    I would tend to agree, for what that's worth. This doesn't seem like the deal that will turn the team around all on its own. Important move, but probably first of at least one more. I gotta agree that getting this done now rather than later was probably smart.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to markw:

    We need someone who can ignite this offense. Perhaps this trade is the jolt this offense needs to start producing. We know they have the talent.

    What I like; besides jumping the market and getting an extra 3 starts out of Quintana is the fact that Theo could add more in a couple of weeks if the offense is still struggling.

    The problem is, I don't think there is a Kenny Lofton type out there.

  • Like I said on Twitter, this probably drops the Cubs' system into the bottom 5 in baseball and elevates Candelario to top prospect status.

  • In reply to Tom U:

    That's because the Cubs minor leaguers all went up to the majors and won a WS last year. That's the best you can hope for. I'll take a WS over a top minor league system any day.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Lildude:

    That's true. I would bet that if we sent down Bryant, Russell, Baez and Almora (all have options left LOL) we would be right back in the top-10.

    I realize that wasn't your point, Tom, but lildude is also right. The Cubs have converted their Farm system into very good MLB talent. Most of them home-grown, but some of them acquired via trade (Montgomery, and Quintana most notably, Russell and Edwards spent some time in the Cubs system before "graduating."). This has to be kept in mind when discussing farm systems and where the Cubs "rank,"

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    First off, I don't make the rankings, but those who do will now most likely downgrade the system. The Cubs were already below 15th in baseball.

    Also, even if some of the players mentioned were optioned back, they would no longer be considered in the rankings. They all are past the service time limits that would qualify them as '"prospects ".

    The last is a statement of fact. When a prospect goes, wherever and however they go, the next one in line takes their place.

  • In reply to Tom U:

    tom, i agree, i told my brother they are now low to mid twenties. out of the top thirty players on mlb pipelines list, 11 are postion players. of those two have a ceiling of fourth outfielder, two are back-up catchers, one is a back-up infielder. one (wilson) is hitting .216 in a ball after hitting about .250 in eugene last year, one is candilerio who has no place to play. this is alittle exageration but it is beginning to look like the orioles system. no potiential impact players at this time. some may develop into that but none now. eloy was the last potential impact bat. they have nothing even close to him.

  • In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    The farm is deep. They do have potential impact players. They just are not close to being MLB ready. Off the top of my head I would call DeLaCruz, Hatch, Little, Albertos, Alzolay and even Hudson as Potential impact players. Are these players for sure guarantees, no but these players have the potential to be impact pitchers.

  • In reply to John57:

    I think Alzolay & possible Maples as being the 2 closest guys in the system that could be big impact players closest to the big leagues. I'm not counting Candelario bc he has spent time with the team. If he was given some consistent playing time he could be a good MLB player that could be a fringe AS type of guy in some seasons

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Tom U:

    Sorry, Tom. I didn't mean any disrespect. My point was that lots of teams have guys similar in age to guys that the Cubs have playing very well at the MLB level in their minor league systems.

    You are correct and I forgot that the Cubs players wouldn't be considered for lists because they had lost their "rookie" eligibility. I do think that the Cubs farm system has lost ground in the rankings. And it should after losing 2 really talented players.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Thank you Joel. I tried to be as bland as I could to sidestep the emotion of this story. If anyone though I was being critical, I apologize. I was just trying to take another angle to assess the fallout of the move.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Tom U:

    And it is a viable angle. I know I got used to simply assuming the Cubs had a farm system that could match up with anyone. This year I am starting to see that thin out and with the loss of Jiminez and Cease it likely does take us to the bottom 1/3. Possibly bottom 5. I don't really know what most teams have in their systems. That well is getting close to dry. But I think we have pumped it pretty well for the last couple of years.

  • Cubs top prospects now???

  • In reply to DarBar15:

    little, alozay, lange, chesny young would be the top guys. Candelario too

  • In reply to DarBar15:

    Best pitchers:
    Jose Albertos
    Oscar De La Cruz
    Adbert Alzolay
    Thomas Hatch
    Trevor Clifton
    Justin Steele
    Brendon Little
    Alex Lange

    Best Position players:
    Jeimer Candelario
    Victor Caratini
    Mark Zagunis
    Charcer Burks
    D.J. Wilson
    Aramis Ademan
    Miguel Amaya
    Eddy Martinez

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Michael, oput of those names, who can you see as an impact MLer by say 2018? Amongst the pitchers, D\e La Cruz and Azolay, possably Little or Lange? The position guys certainly dont have Bryant or Happ written over then, at least not yet.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    By the end of 2018 I think Adbert Alzolay, Thomas Hatch, Trevor Clifton and Oscar De La Cruz can all start challenging for rotation spots with relief roles as fall backs. I'm not sure any can or will make the team at the start of the year though. 2019 is more likely for all of them. They all have MOR upside, but a couple of them might end up in the pen. Little and Lange are the new draft picks, I have no first hand knowledge of them, but there are indications that both could be fast movers, although 2018 would be a real stretch. Albertos is the wild card. He has TOR upside, but he is only 18 and while he could be a fast mover. 2018 will not happen for him and 2019 is very, very unlikely and even 2020 seems far fetched as he has almost no experience at this point and Cubs are generally very conservative with teenage pitchers.

    Jeimer Candelario, Victor Caratini, Mark Zagunis and Charcer Burks can all contribute by the end of next year, in fact the first three are already options this year. Jacob Hannemann and Chesny Young can be nice shuttle players the next couple of years as well, with Young having potential for full time utility role. The others are a couple of years away at least. Wilson is a boom or bust raw CF athlete. Amaya gets rave reviews for his work as a catcher and is beginning to develop as a hitter but is just 18 in rookie ball. Ademan is a slick SS with a nice left handed stick but is also 18 in rookie ball.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    michael, i think de la cruz has to prove he can stay healthy as well.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to mutant beast:

    Beginning of 2018? We'd have to look at the top of the minor leagues. Zagunis, Carartini, Young (and Young might be a stretch, but he might not).

    End of the year is a whole different story. It depends on how these guys develop. A year of minor league development can be huge.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Good thing our position players have graduated and are still babies at the big league level. To have a list with an A Ball OF who can't hit is scary (Yes, I am looking at you Wilson!).

    I don't believe Clifton or Steele make it and Albertos and DLC are so far away.

    The cupboard has become pretty barren quickly.

    I cold see Russell going now to headline a trade for a CF/top of the order hitter or another Quintana-type. And then Davis going for a Top Prospect (like a Gleyber).

  • In reply to rbrucato:

    Yeah, position players really shouldn't be an issue. They probably replace Jay in the offseason, or they could bring him back for one more year, and the rest of the position player roster is under contract for 2018. They'll also have plenty of AAA depth with some combo of Candelario/Zagunis/Young/Hannemann/Burks/Vosler/Bote/Rice. A couple of them probably end up dealt though. But still, depth will not be an issue the next year or so. They have time to let a next wave develop and give plenty of time for a raw player like Wilson as much time as he needs.

    I think Clifton and Steele have better chances to make it in the bullpen than they do as starters. But they do have enough stuff if it all comes together to make it in the rotation. De La Cruz may get pushed there as well if he can't start building up some innings/stay on the mound consistently. Underwood falls in that category too. Alzolay and Hatch are the two best bets to be 2019 rotation pieces.

    The Cubs don't have any Top 100 types remaining in the system with the exception of Albertos, but he is very far away. They have a couple others with that type of ceiling if it all comes together but they have no more super prospects like they have for the past five years.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Ernst:

    I just keep coming back to what you pointed out the other day, Michael. While we still had Jiminez and Cease at the time what the Cubs farm-system looks like is closer to "normal" than what we have seen for the last couple years. Obviously it looks a lot weaker now with out Jiminez and Cease but comparing them to what we had before in recent years is really not fair.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Cubs system is below average now. They still have more depth than a normal system, but they no longer have any TOR/All-Star type prospects that will be ready in the next few years.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    If anyone in the Cub's system were ready in the next few years they'd be blocked anyway.

  • In reply to Lildude:

    Pitchers wouldn't, but yeah position players would.

  • In reply to Lildude:

    The way some of the position players have looked this year I'm not sure that a player of Torres skills would be blocked. I think you could move Russell before his value dropped. This year he's been worse than his career averages, but those aren't exactly great either. He brings value on defense but he hasn't broken out on offense yet.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Ernst:

    That is why I said that I realize this trade changes things. But the fact is that it isn't like we suddenly have NO talent in the system. It is just that all the young, All-Star talent happens to be on the MLB roster rather than at TENN.

    Here, would you like to try on my rose-colored glasses? LOL

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to rbrucato:

    He is young and may not amount to anything. But he might become an MLB player. At this point that is what our farm system is. And there are worse things.

    I am looking forward to reading the minor league assessments after this trade.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    How come you're not a fan of Isaac Paredes?
    Given his age, emerging power, ability to control the strikezone, position (ss), and success in the MWL, he seems like someone to watch.

    Is he destined to end up at 3B? Or is there not much projection left in terms of filling out?

  • In reply to SenatorMendoza:

    I am absolutely a fan of Paredes. He is my favorite prospect in South Bend. Check out the comments section in the Minors Recap today, we talked about him quite a bit before the trade news dropped.

    He could absolutely be added to that list. As could Chesny Young, Duane Underwood, Alec Mills, Dillon Maples and some others. The Cubs have a lot of fluidity in terms of rankings right now. Very little separates prospect #2 from prospect #20 at this point. I'm more of a tiers guy than a numbered ranking anyway.

  • Well, we needed a quality starter, and quintana meets that role. What if another starter got hurt, or if *knock on wood* hendricks has a setback? We'd be looking at Lester, arrieta, lackey?, montgomery?
    In a 7 games series, lester, arreita, hendricks, and quintana should give us a chance to win each game.

  • i don't think you will have to worry about a 7 game series this year.

  • so got Quintana. hate losing Jimenez, but what pitcher do the Cubs sign in the offseason to round out the rotation??

  • In reply to CubfanInUT:

    Darvish.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to mutant beast:

    +1000000000000

    Add Darvish to this rotation for the next 4-5 years, we are pretty set. Theo can work on rebuilding the farm system while this team rolls people in 2018-20.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    Darvish only costs $ and a draft pick. Hed solidify our rotation for 2-3 years at least if healthy, and like any AL pitcher will benefit from a move to the NL. Darvish Lester Q Hendricks, not a bad playoff foursome.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to CubfanInUT:

    Getting a guy that is capable of throwing the top 2 spots opens the possibility of signing someone for a lower spot in the rotation which is MUCH less expensive.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Borrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrringgggg! lol! think the Cubs have more than enough money to make a bigger splash, and will look to do so

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to CubfanInUT:

    Even if they have the funds any owner would tell you he would rather have a low payroll than a high payroll for similar production. Also, the more the Cubs can stay below the Luxury Tax the better. It is easy to spend other people's money. Don't underestimate the money side of this deal.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Good point.

    Staying under the salary cap will be a big factor going forward. Not sure how teams like the Dodgers Red Sox and Yankees are handling that. but it may influence spending on their parts in the future.

  • In reply to DetroitCubFan:

    Sorry, meant to say the Luxury Tax...not salary cap (wrong sport).

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to DetroitCubFan:

    I corrected it in my head and understood what you meant. The Yankees and Dodgers are both swimming in cash. They will pay the penalty and go merrily on their way. I think the Red Sox are in a similar boat.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    I seem to remember the penalty is stiffer for being over the luxury limit. It may include loss of draft picks. No team will want to do that, even the yanks and dodgers.

  • In reply to CubfanInUT:

    Alex Cobb or Michael Pineda

  • As for fulmer, I don't think Detroit made him available. Even if he was, he would have costed even more than quintana. Definitely would have costed players from the major league roster.

  • Fullmer is 24 and only in his 2nd year. Hes a core piece there. I doubt anyone gets him frankly.

  • Wow!

    Bold move by the Cubs FO. Hopefully, Quintana can turn back into a #2 starter the rest of his Cubs career.

    Really hate giving up Jimenez considering how little offensive production we are getting out of RF.

    Would love to know what the asking prices are for Gray and Archer.

  • In reply to DetroitCubFan:

    Archer is probably beyond our reach. Gray certainly isnt worth Quintana, considering his injury risk. Question is, do we match uo with Oakland? Our best position prospect(Candy) happens to play the same places as Chapman and Healy play, 2 of Oaklands better young players.

  • In reply to mutant beast:

    I was mainly asking about the prices of Archer and Gray in comparison to what it costs us for Quintana (not that we should now trade for one of those two guys).

    If anything, this will up the price for Archer and Gray to other teams, who will now be a little more desperate to get that #1 or #2 starter.

  • In reply to DetroitCubFan:

    I still favor a long term move of KB to the OF. Of course, they need a replacement at 3B. Candelario? Not ready, not long enough look?

  • Cubs 3 issues this year: Starting pitching, Situational hitting / RISP, and defense. They are all related. Starting Pitching has been a problem all year for the most part. The first half of the season, they were going with an unproven #5, their #4 is at the end of his career, their #3 has missed more than a month with an injury, their #2 is having a regression in his walk year and their #1 has been up and down. So you could say that all 5 of their starters have regressed. Part of their regression has been the defense behind them. How this manifests itself is on the amount of games they have either trailed from the start or have been behind. It has forced a good lineup to press and we have seen numbers from last year almost completely flip.
    Does adding Quintana address these 3 elements as they relate to this season? My guess is that this move doesn’t make a drastic change for 2017 unless the other 4 starters stabilize the first 3 innings and pitch better. Lester could improve, Arietta as well, Hendricks comes back from the DL and provides them with an 85th percentile 2016 effort, Quintana pitches the way he did in June and we get something out of the 5 spot. The defense is about individual focus and not playing tight. How do you not play tight, stop looking up at the scoreboard and seeing your team down 3-0 in the 2nd inning. Hitting is the same way. It’s hard when every run and AB is critical because you are already down by 3 runs. Hard to work the plan when every out is precious when your starting pitching has put you in a hole in the first 2-3 innings.
    When I look at this trade, unless the other SPs pick up their game and start pitching at a higher level with more consistency, this was a move for 2018 and beyond. This move, while costly in player currency opens up a lot more flexibility for next year and beyond. It doesn’t immediately put the Cubs in it for this year. As Theo said, for 2017, it’s on the players to perform better so anything they get out of this year is on them and a bonus.

  • In reply to joparks:

    This. I think the fact that the team has to play from behind so often has effected the offense and defense. When your starter gives up so many runs in the first and second innings, players start to press, they want to make the big play, they feel like they need to make that big play. Which leads to errors, strike outs and failing to score with RISP. None of the starters has played to their potential, but lets be honest, Lackey looks done, Arrieta is continuing to regress, Montgomery looks better out of the bullpen and Butler is still a work in progress. If Lester gets more consistent and Hendricks comes off the DL at 100%, Quintana shores up the top three starters and takes the pressure off the entire team.

    And I agree, this trade was just about the future as it was this year.

  • From a prospecting perspective this hurts. No question. But the goal is to put together the best team now and for the future at Clark and Addison.

    I believe Cease has higher value as a prospect than he will actually produce in the big leagues (if ever making it). Jimenez is the real gem here. I believe Eloy will have some Sosa-like years. I believe he is that good.

    I wish it were for a Fullmer or a Stroman or Cole as I think Quintana is "meh" -- and I do know he has been solid in previous years. I hope he morphs into the 2/3 we need versus the 3/4 he is today. Still like the K rate, but the walks are a little high. Maybe facing NL teams will help his numbers even more.

    If nothing else this trade makes us better today and the next 2 seasons before Eloy or Dylan even see the big leagues. And the payroll flexibility should be fun to work with. There is a guy we need to retain -- Mr Bryant and his buddy is also available in 2018 too. And I believe there could be plenty of money to bring in Darvish/Cueto to bolster the rotation. Kyle would look pretty darn good as a 4, doesn't he?

  • In reply to rbrucato:

    That's one positive thing about the deal; although we don't have great prospect capital now, we definitely still have plenty of cash to sign some veterans like a darvish or harper

  • 6 man rotation? or Lackey to the bullpen?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to CubfanInUT:

    I think Butler goes to AAA and Montgomery goes back to the 'pen. Then, if they need a 6th starter they can move either of them into the role. Lackey still has value. Not much, but he has some.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    That sounds right to me. One of Lackey/Anderson will be the 5th starter when they get healthy. Butler will be insurance in AAA. Montgomery will go to the pen and be used as the swing man again.

  • Love this trade for the Cubs.

    Last year at the deadline the Cubs gave up an arguably better package of Torres (an elite prospect like Eloy), an MLB pitcher in Adam Warren, a top 10 prospect in McKinney and a very high ceiling guy and exciting player in Rashad Crawford. And really, since they traded Castro to get Warren in the offseason, you can count Starlin, an All Star, as part of that deal too if you like. All to rent Chapman for 3 months. And you know what, that was a great trade. You know why, because it helped the Cubs win the World Series!

    Today they get one of the best pitchers in baseball, a legit #2 guy, the best pitcher available, who is only 28, and on a ridiculously team friendly contract through 2020. And somehow you get him without giving up any MLB players. Not one. It's unbelievable. Sure you lose another elite prospect in Eloy, but besides that you give up a top pitching prospect who had TJS a few years ago, and a couple spare parts. The Cubs gave up less for Q than they did for Chapman, and unlike Chapman who they only had for one postseason, they get Q for the next 4 postseasons. It's an incredibly good move by Theo/Jed. Again.

    This gives you Lester, Q, Jake, and Kyle (if he's healthy) for the postseason. That's a pretty formidable starting 4. And it lengthens the Cubs bullpen to make it even stronger. And last but not least, this keeps Q off the Brewers, Astros, Yankees, and any other team that the Cubs may compete with not only this year, but for the next 3 years after that.

    It’s a great day to be a Cubs fan!

  • I actually like it. I've been saying all year the Cubs need pitching, not just for this season, but for next year. Quintana checks all the boxes. TOR, young, cost controlled for 3.5 years. He had a rough start to the year, but seems to have been steadily improving.

    Jimenez looked like the real deal, but he's what, 2 years away? Quintana fills a big need now. Cease has a lot of potential, but also a lot of risk. Who knows if his arm would hold up to be a starter in 3+ years. Quintana is here and healthy now. To get a TOR starter without giving up someone off the big league roster is huge.

    I agree the Cubs aren't done. There could very well be a deal that involves someone off the 25 man. But the fact that this deal didn't, makes another one possible.

  • I know it's 2017... but do we (the CD Hivemind) believe that resigning Arrieta is in the cards?

    Unless he's just soured on the organization as a whole (possible), I don't think he's going to cost as much as we would have thought in 2016 and might still be able to be a valued part of the future.

    Lester, Quintana, Arrieta, Hendricks might be enough to not force us to break the bank for Darvish/Cueto in 2018.

  • In reply to awfullyquiet:

    There are teams more desperate for starting pitching that will be more willing to give Arrieta extra years on his deal. I think the Cubs would be willing to match any money over the next 3 years for Arrieta, but other teams willing to tack an extra 3-4 years on his deal that the Cubs will never consider.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to awfullyquiet:

    Unfortunately Arrieta w Boras is going to cost very similar money to Darvish/Cueto. Money being similar, give me Darvish/Cueto over Jake any day of the week.

    I guess we could get lucky and Arrieta bombs the rest of the year and signs a 1 year/rebuild value contract? If that's the case, do we really want him?

  • Sox fans feel today like we did when the Smardzija/Russell trade was made.

  • In reply to rbrucato:

    I remember Hoyer saying that he would have made the same deal that Beane did if the cubs were in the same position. Looks like he held true to his word.

  • He one upped Beane with the Chapman trade. He gave up more for a rental closer than Beane did for a #2 SP with another year of control. I think you could argue that the Cubs didn't get nearly enough value for Shark. They only got 1 top 5 prospect while the Yankees received this years top 5 prospect (top overall on some lists), a MLB arm, & 2 top 30 organizational prospects. Imagine how fast the rebuild would of been with these prices.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to rbrucato:

    I actually had dinner last night with a guy that I found out was a White Sox fan. His first question, "What do you know about the guy (singular, oddly) that the Sox got for Quintana?" I said there are some very upset Cubs fans and that Jiminez is the real deal. And that it was a good trade for both teams because it will help both of them reach their goals.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Come to think of it, what I should have said was reference Michael and point out that Matt Rose has legit power but something of a long swing and is a long-shot to play in the major leagues and watch his face fall.

  • fb_avatar

    The Cubs just added another Jon Lester at half the dollar price. If you don't think Quintana is Lester, please do take a look at his peripherals over the last few seasons. They've pitched to similar WAR totals in the past 3 years, as well as similar IP, BB%, K%. This is a great add. I know the prospects hurt, but it is the price to get pitching. I doubt TB is so willing to give up Archer right now, when they may have a shot at a WC spot if things keep going their way. Gray is not on Quintana's level either. This is a good move for the Cubs.

  • In reply to Joe Martínez:

    So funny you mention this, Joe. I was actually thinking this on my way home from work and was going to post something similar. Quintana is not an Ace, but neither is Lester. They are both serviceable #1 types who would be/are among the best #2s in the game. But I'd be fine with 5 #2 type pitchers!

    I like this trade for this year, but LOVE it for the next few years. The Cubs were looking at really having to plug 3 SP slots this offseason if they didn't make a trade this summer. As it is, they'll still have to get 2 more SPs unless they feel Butler or Montgomery is their #5 (I sort of hope not. I like Montgomery a lot in the pen and not so much as a starter. Butler is just a guy which many #5s are, but he can't really seem to eat up many innings).

  • fb_avatar

    We did a deal and lost no proven player. I love Cease but he's a few years away and the same for Jimenez. I still think that Schwarbs might be traded and we could get back either a major league player or several high prospects and we can restock or system a bit that way.
    Remember, out ML team has only Zo as a starter (?) who is over 30. We are in a unique situation where most of our players haven't reached their peak years. That's why we can trade our high, very young prospects..

  • An Otani, Lester, Quintana 1,2,3 is going to look very nice the next couple of years.

  • In reply to GSmit:

    Otani would be insane, but if he wants to bat, like he said he does, he would be much better off signing with an AL team.

  • I'm not a fan of moving Jimenez but I understand why it was necessary. To me this goes back to the Cubs inability to develop any type of pitching on there own. Good cost controlled starting pitching is the most valuable asset in baseball right now. You either draft and develop it yourself or you pay through the nose with cash for FA or prospects in a trade.

  • Great replacement for Arrietta.

  • I'm in town for sales meetings and my company is touring the park today. ABC 7 just interviewed me on the trade! I'm the guy in a turquoise shirt

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to TC154:

    General Hospital is on ABC on my tv.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to TC154:

    Please tell me you said that the LAST thing the Cubs need is another pitcher. "Half the roster is pitchers for crying out loud!" LOL

  • Ok I see Floro and Butler going back down for Hendricks and Lackey but, who is going to be the other guy?

  • In reply to Wickdipper:

    Would have to be LaStella or Grimm. Hopefully Lackey stays on the DL.
    I trust Montgomery as the 5 way more than him.

  • I disagree with those saying Quintana is a #2-3.

    He's more like a borderline #1. He may not be "elite," but if there's a line between elite and just below it, Quintana is the line. Most underrated pitcher in baseball, in my opinion.

    From 2014 to now, Quintana ranks 7th in MLB starting pitcher WAR, and 8th in ERA.
    He is really, really good.

  • In reply to Kramerica20:

    He is a #2 to me. He is basically what Lackey was a decade ago. You can pencil in 30+ starts and 200 innings and you know he is going to keep you in just about every game he pitches. You aren't going to get shutouts and dominating performances like Arrieta or Lester can post though.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    That's fair. Jeff Sullivan did an article on fangraphs and compared Quintana's numbers to Lester's. Identical.

  • In reply to Kramerica20:

    Lester has 9 CGs since Quintana entered the majors. Q has 1. Lester also has two seasons of Sub-3.00 ERA.

    That is the difference between a #1 and #2 to me. The ability to pitch deeper into games and dominate on occasion. Even if Q is bit more consistent and the two guys are the within earshot 90% of the time, it is the 10% of the time when Lester is noticeably superior that is the difference imo.

  • In reply to Kramerica20:

    He gets underrated because he pitched behind Sale.

    #1, #2, or #3 it doesn't really matter in my opinion. Either way he throws every 5th day. As you corretly point out, we are getting a quality arm for the next few years. Best of all we get him at a team fiendly price.

  • In reply to Kramerica20:

    he is a 2-3 on a good team.

  • Give Arrieta and Davis QO's at the end of the season and now you have 3 picks in the Top 50 of the draft. Plenty to start replenishing the system.

    As mentioned earlier, the position guys are set for 4 years, many pieces in place for the pen with more arms coming (Maples, Dekkes, Zastryzny etc).

    Plenty of time to rebuild system.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to IrwinFletcher:

    Don't want to burst your bubble, but......

    Arrieta and Davis QO's only get you picks at the end of the 2nd or 3rd round. No more 1st round sandwich compensation!

    That's why so many Cubs fans want the Cubs to sell. They know that Arrieta and Davis ( esp DAVIS) are worth much much more then those draft picks.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    i wouldn't mind seeing seeing them move davis to the nats for a package including robles. based on what the cubs paid for chapman as a rental that should be in the ballpark and the nats need bullpen help badly, in fact throw in uheriha and get feede,robles and a couple others.

  • In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    Are we trying to win the Carolina League championship or the World Series championship?

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Well said Michael. LOL. We are in win now mode. Win as many championships as we can for as long as we can. Why does so many want to restock the farm system?

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    both, ws now and ws in 10 years. and moving davis only if they continue to wet the bed..unless the starting pitching, fielding and hitting get better there won't be a world series this year. starting pitching isn't the only problem. if they were one starter away i wouldn't like the move but could live with it. by the way. cubs have one starter swarber with a .210 career avg and another russell with a .237 career avg. do i think they are better yes but they haven't proven it yet. and yes i want to win the carolina league championship because those are some of the guys who will(would have ) won the WS in ten years when the current crop is expensive and gone and since i may be banned after this tell 2016 cubs the same damn thing.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Aren't we the defending champions on both? And, if so, does it really matter which one we choose? ;)

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Yes Michael! This is our window. Let's ride this pony until there is no more giddy-up in her. Davis should stay and be re-signed at the end of the year. I still have hope that the Cubs can overtake the Brewers, the FREAKIN' Brewers. (BTW, hats off to the Brewmen for having a great season. I just hope you finish second.) We're gonna watch now, why ya gotta play the game. Let's Go Cubs!

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    Those are accurate points, but I wanted to add a comment for all those (rightfully) concerned about re-stocking the farm: the Cubs have been in the IFA "penalty-box" the last two seasons, unable to sign top international prospects. We will hit the market in a big way next June and add some impact talent that could be ready by the time the young MLB core are hitting free-agency.

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    There is a hard cap on IFA signings now. Cap space is based on market size I believe, with the Cubs being in group with lowest slot. They can trade for slots, but can't go crazy like they did in 13 & 15. Will be much harder to get acquire prospects under the new CBA for the Cubs. I'm not saying it's a bad trade, but we can't go buy prospects in IFA & get 1st round comps for Arrieta & Davis to restock the farm. I'm not saying you are proposing those things, just have seen fans say tvis in general

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    no you can't because spending is capped at 4.75 million for the cubs. they can't exceed that with penalty box time anymore.

  • In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    There are three tiers in the new spending caps, and the Cubs are at the bottom at $4.75M. But the penalties limited us from signing any player to a bonus of more than $300K. That kept us from signing any top players, and had us trading away available slot money to reduce prospect cost, like we did in acquiring Butler from Colorado. Next June we can sign guys again, and trade our allotment up to about $8M. Our FO knows what they are doing.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to BarleyPop:

    How did the Cubs pull this off:
    https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/07/nl-international-signings-7217.html

    It says they signed Verdugo for $1M. Well over the $300K limit.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    You can go over the limit to sign Mexican players that are playing in the Mexican League because it is a pro league and the majority of the bonus goes to buy out their contract with their team and not to the player.

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    I was under the impression that instead of getting the draft pick from the team that signs the player you gave a QO to, you simply get another draft pick at the end of the first round, while the team who signs the player simply loses their first round pick.

    That is why the Cubs had two first round picks in 2017.

    Maybe Michael can clarify.

  • In reply to IrwinFletcher:

    That all changed last year. I've been trying to find the exact info for the QO. The way I read it is :

    •Teams Losing QO Player

    Revenue sharing Payee's(small market) will receive a pick after the 1st round if the player makes over $50M.

    Teams over the Luxury Tax will receive pick after 4th round

    All other teams receive pick following 2nd round.

    •Teams signing QO player

    Small Market clubs will forfeit their 3rd highest selection

    Teams in luxury tax will forfeit their 2nd & 5th round pick, plus lose $1M of their IFA bonus pool (to be divided equally among remaining teams)

    All other teams will lose their 2nd highest draft pick & lose $500K from their IFA bonus pool

  • In reply to IrwinFletcher:

    this was the last year for that under the old cba. new one has several different perameters from after the second round to after the fifth round for luxury tax violators ( i think tax has to be over a certain amount to get the worst but can't remember for sure.)

  • I feel more excitement and potential upside for prospects 5-8 then I do about the 1-4 guys on this list:

    Yikes so much for waves and waves but as the old saying goes, “A Bird in the Hand is Worth Two in the Bush.”

    http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2017?list=chc

  • In reply to CubFanStuckInStl:

    The waves have been crashing on the shores of Lake Michigan for several years. Baez and Soler in '14, Bryant, Russell, and Schwarber in '15, Contreras, Almora Jr., and Edwards Jr. in '16, and so far Happ in '17. When you graduate that many studs, the waves begin to calm. As I stated in another comment to those worried about replenishing the farm, we've been locked out of the IFA market the last two years. We'll hit it hard next June, in time for some of that talent to develop before the young core begin hitting free-agency.

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    won't hit it hard with the hard caps on spending.

  • Arrieta was better over the past few seasons, but look at where he is at now...lets hope that Quintana rights the ship. I am not happy both Cease and Jimenez were included in this deal, but I will defer to the judgement of Lord Theo..the King of the World Champion Cubs.

  • How 'bout this? Let's assume the Cards' interest in Josh Donaldson is legit and that the Jays come to the realization (rightly so) that they're not going anywhere this year. If the Jays make the trade, they need an MLB-ready third baseman. Theo puts in a call to Ross Atkins and says, "Hey... how 'bout Jeimer & Kyle for Marcus Stroman?" They haggle for a few minutes and agree to some additional lesser pieces going back and forth, then get it done.

    Cubs end up with the second stud piece they need for the rotation looking forward. They improve their defense by removing Schwarbs from left. They create room for Happ & Baez to play every day. And... they weaken the Cardinals system in the process. What's not to like? What am I missing?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to WrigleyRay:

    In an ideal world, that would be wonderful.

    Unfortunately the Jays are going to shop Liriano and the next Happ before Stroman.

  • Plan for rotation next year:
    Lester
    Hendricks
    Quintana
    ?????
    Butler/Montgomery/Mills/Zastryzny

    Mills and Zastryzny get forgotten because the have missed most of season with injury but they will be options as rotation depth/swing men next year.

    Some combo of Mills, Zastryzny, Frankoff, Clifton, Tseng, Underwood, Hedges, Morrison and Williams in the Iowa rotation as depth.

    Alzolay, Hatch, Steele, Rucker and maybe De La Cruz at some point in AA rotation with Alzolay and Hatch potentially ready to move up to AAA at some point during the year.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Assuming that Hendricks can get some of his mojo back to close out this year - that's a solid top 3 SP.

    With Lester and Quintana both being Lefties,... would that put Montgomery and Zastryzny at a disadvantage for rotation spots?

  • In reply to drkazmd65:

    Yeah, a lot depends on Hendricks.

    I think Z and Monty are both better suited to the pen. But not because I worry about too many lefties in the rotation.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    That is not very appealing, IMO. That same rotation is what got us in trouble this year.

    Need another legit piece in there. That 5 spot is a black hole. I would not be comfortable with any combo of those guys making 32 starts.

    There will be a Lackey-type or someone to grab occupying that 5th spot.

  • In reply to rbrucato:

    They will get a proven guy for the 4 spot. They will also undoubtedly bring in either an Anderson/Cahill/Richard type vet or another Butler/Montgomery type former prospect still looking to breakthrough to compete for the 5th spot.

    This FO believes in having 8-9 SP options heading into a season. We are suffering now because 3 guys in the MLB rotation and 3 guys in AAA rotation (Zastryzny/Williams/Mills) are all hurt. That is bad luck. I would wager they add two more starters including a proven guy before next spring begins.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Ernst:

    And a #4 is a lot easier to find/sign than a #2/3

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    This really clarifies it for me. Thanks Michael.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Michael:

    What about Alex Cobb to fill those ?????. He'll be another year removed from TJS and still has pretty good upside.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    I say otani for that 4th slot. The cubs will have the cash.

  • Since the early 80's I've had a habit of making a yearly "ex-Cubs" team, with the question of if they could play .500 ball. This year's edition probably could, and now they are developing an impactful farm system as well!

    I say that only half-jokingly, because from passive recollection, the better the "ex" team, the better the health of the organization. Lots of talent flowing in and out. But of course saying the organization as a whole is in pretty good shape is stating the obvious.

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    Good call. Look at the all-star infield of former cubs.....donaldson, castro, lemehiu and bour.

    Still am happy with where we are at.

    On another note Jorge soler was a cant miss right handed power OF 5 years ago. I am just saying, Quintana has track record Jimenez and cease are prospects. Go cubs!

  • http://www.thebaseballcube.com/reports/compare.asp
    This link is a comparison of C. Archer and J. Quintana.
    They are almost identical pitchers.
    Archer strikes out more per 9 but also walks more
    Quintana has more innings pitched
    I was shocked at how similar the two were with the way Archer is viewed more as an "ace" and some are calling Quintana a # 2-3 type.

  • I like this trade,... assuming that the Cubs planned on giving Milwaukee a run for the Division title - they pretty much had to make a move like this.

    Losing Jiminez's and Cease's potential future value (2-3 years down the line most probably) in trade for a guy who has already been a quality MLB pitcher for a few years, and who is under cost control for the next 3 seasons,... not a bad deal.

    Could we all look back at this trade 5+ years from now when Jiminez is putting up HOF-caliber stats and when Cease has harnessed his control and is a dominant MLB pitcher? Sure. But if the goal is to right the ship this season & not just go into "Wait Until Next Year" mode,... you got to try something like this.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to drkazmd65:

    To me this trade is MORE to do with next year (and the 2 years after that) than it is about righting the ship this year. This year the best the Cubs can hope for is that the Brewers return to Earth and the Cubs overtake them and make it to the playoffs as NLC champs (I don't think the WC is coming out of the NLC). At that point we have a rotation of Lester, Hendricks, Quintana, Arrieta (not necessarily in that order). While not necessarily the best rotation in the playoffs at least each game will be pitched by a good pitcher unlike 2015-2016 playoffs. In short, it is a better rotation than we had otherwise. But this is about having another solid pitcher under team control and in his "prime years" for the next several years and answers the "How will the Cubs replace Arrieta?" questions.

  • I don't want arrieta re-signed.Some other team can pay him 120+ million to be inconsistent into his mid 30's.I appreciate what he's done for the cubs but he definitely won't be worth his next contract.

  • I realize that this is always how it will be but I smile at the criticisms of Theo & Co. I am 68. I was not only prepared to die without a title, I was resigned to never even see the Cubs in the Series. That was the fate of many, many fans including my best friend who died in '69. I have been able to see them win. I am pretty happy. I will go along with the folks who provided that experience.

  • Keep this in perspective:
    The Cubs have 5 top 50 prospects in their everyday lineup (Bryant, Rizzo, Russell, Baez, Contreras)

    The Cubs have traded three top 50 prospects in the past year (Torres, Soler, Jimenez).

    But they have also graduated 3 (Contreras, Happ, Almora).

    And they have one top 50 prospect sitting on the bench on any given day (Baez, Happ, Almora).

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    I mentioned this up higher in the comments as well but I think it bears mentioning here as well:

    With the exception of John Jay this offseason the Cubs do not have a single position player eligible for FA until after the 2020 season, and that is only Tommy La Stella. In 2021 is when we have Baez, Bryant, Rizzo and Russell all coming up. We don't need a wave of position players for at least 2 years. By then we will have a better idea of where Amaya, Ademan, Wilson, Paredes, Martinez, Galindo stand as potential replacements.

    The Cubs do have a wave of pitching coming in late 2018/2019. Injuries/regression will cull some of them, but they figure to get one starter out of Clifton, Alzolay, Hatch, De La Cruz, Underwood, Steele, Tseng, Morrison, Hedges and probably a reliever or two out of those guys plus Maples, Mekkes, Paulino, Rucker, and others. Behind that we have Albertos, Hudson, Moreno and the 2017 draft class, plus others. And don't sleep on Maples as a potential back end of the bullpen piece, the guy's stuff has been absolutely electric this season. He is 95-99 right now with a wipe out slider in the high 80s and hard curve in the low 80s.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Thank you. This does indicate an exceptional level of roster stability (don't have to worry about "replacing" departing FA) after a long stretch of extreme volatility. I believe there is no one left on the roster from Opening Day 2014 roster (Rizzo). Think about that for a moment.

  • The more I read about Quintana, and the more I read the comments on here, the more I really like this trade...not only for this year...but for a good portion of the Cubs competitive window. Well done front office.

  • I'm not gonna get into the bad/good trade debate. Here's why I am happy:

    1. We got a stud LHP pitcher for the next 3.5 years
    2. Theo didn't wait and pulled the trigger BEFORE the 2nd half even got started.
    3. The team must be ecstatic to know help has arrived.
    4. And Theo sent a message loud and clear to the boys that he believes in them. As do I.

    This is super exciting.
    We got want we needed.
    Bring on the Brewers!
    Let's Go Cubs!

  • In reply to TTP:

    All very good points. Some look at the positives, others the negatives. I like your approach.

  • I'm amused by the people who see an urgent need to restock the farm system. Yeah, I love having a top-rated system and reading about prospects and watching them develop, but we are the WS CHAMPS. We've gotten so used to waiting for prospects that we forget what it takes to be a winner and stay a winner. Chances are good that we'll never see a talented young core like this again, so I approve of adding a pitcher who can help the team win over the next several years. Only half a season ago, this team was one of the favorites to win a World Series, and even if they can't right the ship this year, they still have a number of years of contention left. I hate to lose the high ceilings of Jimenez and Cease, but I'm OK with it considering the addition of a proven talent who checks so many boxes for what this team needs.

  • In reply to seattlecub:

    Having a bottom farm system just hamstrings you in the moves you can make. Look at the Angels & Giants. They have to use FA to fill any holes on their roster & lack the resources to add to it at the deadline. The Giants are now pretty stuck with high priced FA who aren't performing. Maybe they'll get lucky & those guys turn it around or they can move some of them, but their window was slammed mighty hard in the 2nd half of last year when everyone thought they were a lock to make the WS. This team won last year but that does zero good going forward if Russell & Schwarber hit .220 next year too. This trade gave the Cubs a SP for the next 3.5 years at a great AAV, but I am worried about not having anyone in the minors to use in trades or depth

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to seattlecub:

    I am one who is talking about re-stocking the farm. I am not saying we need to get back to being Top-5 (or even Top-10) but, rather, that we need to get to the point where we aren't in the bottom 3rd. Farm system pieces are valuable as trade fodder but also as low priced replacements. If you have a guy you can pull up from your own minor leagues you don't have to acquire them at "market prices." Most teams have to fill some holes using trades and FA but the more you can do just through development the better off you are.

  • fb_avatar

    the cubs basically broke the bank for a no.3 pitcher and now has the worst farm system in mlb. This crappy team is still going to finish a distant 3rd place behind brewers and cardinals

  • In reply to Greg Simmons:

    How do you know so much about the future? Care to share the winning lotto numbers with us as well? Or would you rather just make pessimistic comments?

  • In reply to Greg Simmons:

    ......check back here in October.......we'll be happy to let you know how your prediction worked out.....

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Greg Simmons:

    Most put Quintana as a #1 or #2. There are some that say #3 but they are a distinct minority. It doesn't make them wrong, but it is far from a foregone conclusion that he is a #3.

    The Cubs don't have the worst farm system in baseball. It is certainly weaker than it was about 24 hours ago but that doesn't make it the worst.

    They might finish 3rd. But the Brewers are playing beyond their "potential" and may well have a regression. The Cardinals aren't any better than the Cubs and haven't done anything to improve. Either of them COULD just as likely finish 3rd.

  • fb_avatar

    I think the Cubs got the better end of this deal. Rose and Flete? Not even prospects.

  • In reply to Jim Pedigo:

    no but cease and jimenez are. cubs might be better off for a couple of years. sox will be even better off for about 6 years after their return hits the show. saw a good analogy higher up. tigers traded for doyle alexander who helped them get to the WS by going 9-0 after the trade, among prospects braves recieved in return was john smoltz. who do you think go the best of the deal.

  • 280 comments so far.

    Den-ites are riled up.

  • In reply to Oneear:

    I remember shortly after we won the World Series, North Side chimed in on the Game 7 thread that he thought we had just broken the comment record. I think that thread finished at 446, and that was WINNING THE WORLD SERIES! This is right at 300 and counting. Trade our two top prospects for one of the best young pitchers in baseball and all hell breaks loose...

  • Interestingly (well, to me at least), this deal makes me more interested in Schwarber + for Fullmer. That would lock in Lester, Fullmer, Q, Hendricks as the 1-4 for a few years. If you pair that with a lineup of players still coming into their prime, the next 3-4 years would look very bright.

    Just my two cents.

  • In reply to Steve4cash:

    I can't figure out why anyone would think Detroit would want Schwarber. They haven't even begun their rebuild yet and are probably 5-7 years aways from contending. He doesn't help them at all.

  • I like the trade. The White Sox get great potential talent that fits their window of opportunity. We get cost controlled starting pitching through our window. Did we give up more talent? I'd say yes. But in return we get good talent that better fits our window of opportunity. The move also frees up money to use on free agents or exending our own guys.

    As good as Jimenez and Cease are there are no guarantees. Sometimes, I think we have a hard time giving up prospects because ours have been so successful the last couple of years. What happened last year is really rare. You don't just bring up that many guys and have them perform that well especially under those conditions.

  • Maybe a dumb question, but here goes: how is a TOR pitcher defined and why does Quintana fall short? If a TOR pitcher is literally someone who's good enough to be top of an MLB rotation, then can't you make the case that these are the 30 best pitchers in the Majors (even if some teams don't have any, and other teams have more than one)? Quintana is no Sale or Kershaw, but he's been a top-10 pitcher over the last three years by fWAR. So why is he just a 2/3 -- is it the lack of dominant outings, or something else?

    Assuming Quintana holds up through 2020, then maybe the Cubs in a way have landed their TOR pitcher. And if he's a 2/3 in the Cubs rotation because of even better starters, that's a sign of a very fearsome pitching staff.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to October:

    I have heard a couple different definitions so it kind of depends on who you ask.

    1. Has at least 2 "plus" to "plus-plus" pitches, no pitches that grade/rate "below average" and generally rate as above average on even his "secondary stuff" and at least average, but usually better, command. I call this the Scouting/Talent definition.

    2. The horse of the rotation. We EXPECT 200+ IP from him with an ERA in the Low 3.00s at the highest, preferably in the mid-low 2.00's. I call this the Production definition

    3. The guy that will stop a losing streak or can throw a complete game even if he is "tired" when the bullpen is exhausted.

    I am sure there are other definitions or variations on these. Some will tell you that there are only 3-5 TOR starters in MLB. Others will insist that in 2015 the Mets had 2-3 by themselves and if your team didn't have at least 1 you would struggle to get a winning record.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    Thanks, Joel. Quintana probably falls a little short, then. But he's still quite an asset to our pitching staff, especially with his contract.

  • So here's a different angle on this trade and Quintana. Quintana is basically a younger Jon Lester. Lester's fWAR the past 3 years prior to 2017 13.9, Quintana's 14.8. Lester's lifetime FIP 3.52, Quintana's 3.52. Cole Hamels' three year stretch at the same age as Q 12.8. Quintana had a tough start to the year but since June 1st has been outstanding and better than his career numbers. In return we gave up a pitcher who's more likely to be a closer than a starter and, admittedly, a very good middle of the order type bat. both 2.5-4 years away from contributing. Theo and Jed like consistency, it's why they signed Lester and they basically traded for his Colombian clone at the going rate for starting pitching. People loved getting Lester and clamored for Cole Hamels. Quintana is a nearly identical pitcher to both and he's 28 with 3.5 years of control. I think people who are upset should reevaluate.

  • In reply to TC154:

    lester only cost money, not the number 5-8 prospect in baseball and the only impact bat left in the system at this time.

  • In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    True, but there aren't any guys really coming up in FA and Eloy would have gone in any trade for pitching. The Cubs initial window will be closing around the time those two emerge. If Quintana keeps this team a contender through their window and helps them win a second WS nobody is going care about Jiminez and Cease in 2021 when they'll be regulars if they make it. They are still prospects.

  • In reply to TC154:

    tc, who said the window had to close. atlanta won 10 straight division titles. they did it with a constant flow of new blood. usually , if i remember correctly, they would start one new guy a year andrew jones, ryan klesko,chipper jones, ect. i don't want to win for 5 years,i want to win for 10, 15 years and it can be done.

  • In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    Lester cost 100M more in money. Is Eloy and Cease worth 100M dollars?

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Mike,ask that question in 3-5 years. The answer may be yes

  • In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    The Cubs will have difficultly paying another ~25M/yr salary in the starting rotation. That is part of the attractiveness of Quintana, his low AAV.

  • In reply to John57:

    no they wouldn't because arietta and lackey will be gone. there is the 25 mil right there.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    Yes, DL, there is a chance that this blows up in our face like the Smoltz for Alexander trade did.

    But there is at least as good of a chance that Jiminez and Cease do not reach their "ceilings." It is even possible that NEITHER of them develop into anything like their potential. It wouldn't be the first time that a guy with a ton of talent in A+ ball wasn't able to fulfill it and ended up being a decent but not outstanding player. As talented as they both are there is a reason that the Cubs had to give the White Sox both of them. It is to give the White Sox a better chance to have at least one of them succeed. The Cubs aren't so desperate that they had to give up whatever the White Sox wanted to get Quintana. A minor leaguer, especially one below AA ball is inherently risky, even those as talented as what the Cubs gave up.

  • In reply to Joel Mayer:

    joel, hahn was quoted as saying this deal was by and away the best offer they got in the year or so they were looking to move quantana, other clubs weren't willing to pay the price. that the cubs were looks to be exactly that.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    I hadn't read/heard about Hahn saying that. If so that could be an important bit of information.

  • Wow. Just took a look at a Facebook Cubs Fan page... All kinds of stupid there discussing the trade. Makes me glad I found this place. I may disagree with folks here but at least we're usually somewhat rational.

  • In a fun turn of events Eloy Jimenez, Bryant Flete and Matt Rose are all playing against Myrtle Beach tonight.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    That. Is funny... Any corresponding call ups to Myrtle yet to replace them?

  • In reply to Milk Stout:

    Caro, Machin and Paula. Paula is the only one in the lineup.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    I haven't seen Caro on the the transaction list yet, but that would be most fortunate. The article I have scheduled for Monday is on Roberto Caro.

  • In reply to Milk Stout:

    The Cubs have promoted Adonis Paula to Myrtle Beach.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    Eloy just knocked in two runs, including Flete.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    This doesn't make it better.

  • In reply to Michael Ernst:

    I haven't mapped out the schedule and rotation, but I would think Quintana gets a start against the White Sox.

  • In reply to BarleyPop:

    Yes he's starting Sunday against the Orioles. If he stays on normal rotation his next starts would be Sat 7/22 vs the Cardinals & Thurs 7/27 vs the CWS

  • Is Eloy Jiminez the next Frank Thomas?

  • In reply to Roe Skidmore:

    No. Eloy can actually run for more than one base on a hit to the outfield.

  • In reply to Tom U:

    I didn't mean a perfect match, I meant the Sox next great player.

  • In reply to Tom U:

    tom, sounds like you and i are both pissed about this trade.

  • In reply to DLROBERTSON:

    Let's just say this, and it all doesn't have to do with the trade. It was a very emotionally draining day for me today.

  • fb_avatar

    I agree with TC154. I see Lester when I watch Q. This is a great deal for the Cubs. I know they didn't lose anyone from the ML roster but I doubt that Hahn wanted anyone--get prospects because the Sox will lose more games that way and therefore get a higher draft choice. I never wanted Sonny Gray because he has a history of injuries and Q doesn't. This could solidify our staff. By next week we'll have 2 cost controlled young pitchers--Hendricks and Quintana.
    I have advocated trading Davis and putting CJ in as our closer and bringing up Pierce Johnson or even Maples later in the year. Now we're in a good position--not yet great because we have to hit and field but we ought to be able to pitch.

  • In reply to Jonathan Friedman:

    Didn't Maples strike out the side 3 games in a row or did I misread?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Roe Skidmore:

    I think he did.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Roe Skidmore:

    Yes.

  • In reply to Roe Skidmore:

    They should nickname him Xerox bc it looks like he's been photocopying his line score the past several games. I keep thinking I'm reading old recaps bc I keep seeing
    Maples 1.0 IP, 1BB, 3K

  • In reply to Roe Skidmore:

    4 times in a row actually. His last 12 outs are via K

  • I think I'll like this trade the further away from it I get. Last year I wanted to throw up when I saw the Chapman trade, but after a few weeks a started feeling better about it & actually defended it after they won the WS. This trade is no where near the overpay that one was, but it ducks seeing Jimenez go. I had imagined him to be the player we all hoped Soler would be, but better. Cease was an interesting lottery ticket, but I really don't think he ever reaches his ceiling as a TOR SP & is most likely a lockdown closer, which will is still pretty valuable. I love all the prospects & want to keep them all, plus take all the other teams top ones, which is why I'd be an awful GM, except for a team like the Pirates that is constantly rebuilding.Kidding. Once I get over the shock of losing my favorite prospect I'm sure I'll think this was a great trade for the Cubs, but today I'm sad to see them go even if it brings that controllable All Star pitcher we've all been waiting for

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Bamacub:

    Are you serious? All we really gave up to the yanks was torres...this trade cost us our 2 top prospects with one of them having a much higher ceiling than Torres will ever have.

  • In reply to Greg Simmons:

    Torres is the 1 or 2 ranked prospect in MiLB depending on the list. You're also forgetting about Warren, who was traded for Castro (who is now a 4 time All Star after his selection this year). Torres was injured playing AAA while Cease & Jimenez haven't made it past A+. Torres is also younger than both & could of been ready to play in the MLB this year. I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or a troll job honestly

  • fb_avatar

    How about a 2020 Cubs rotation with four lefties in it?

    Jon Lester
    José Quintana
    Brendon Little
    Mike Montgomery

    Of course we could always sign Bumgarner after 2019 and make it five lefties.

  • Current top prospect list from MLB Pipeline

    http://m.mlb.com/prospects/2017?list=chc

  • Getting closer to a Cubs Den-record number of comments. This deal obviously brings out strong emotions for and against. I've mainly stayed out of it as ya'll are making great points. I like the deal, myself. Losing Eloy and Dylan sucks, but that's the price of poker. How about a little rock and roll? This is from a tune my Dad always preached to my whiney little brother when he didn't get his way. Not everyone will be happy with every outcome in life, or sports, so this seems appropriate:

    "And I went down to the demonstration.
    To get my fair share of abuse.
    Singing "We're gonna vent our frustration.
    And if we don't, we're gonna blow a 50-amp fuse".

  • Has anyone else seen where this trade was broken last night by 2 Reddit users who go by the names of wetbutt23 & katyperrysbootyhole but due to their screen names no one took them seriously. Wetbutt23 is now saying there is a trade in place for Schwarber & Almora going to Detroit, although I think they've said this one is untrue. This might be a good trade if Fulmer is the return. Bryant can slide to LF/CF/3B, Happ CF, Heyward RF/CF, Candelario 3B, Baez 2B & Zo wherever

  • In reply to Bamacub:

    Researching this story is pretty amazing. The 2 guys broke the news 13 hours before any member of the media had the story with the exact players & details. The DET trade was a troll job, but they apparently have sources inside the team so I will listen to wetbutt23 & katyperrysbootyhole next time they say they have a trade to brake. They are like the new MLB Woj

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Bamacub:

    I thought that one of those is really either Jed or Theo. That's the speculation.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Bamacub:

    I do feel like this would be a good trade, and def feel Candy could be penciled in at 3rd base and his bat couldn't be any worse then the Schwarbenators.

    Trading Kyle and Almora, I doubt because the Cubs would then have to find another CF via trade, but if its to bring Fulmer back ( doubt Detroit will let him go this year) how can you go wrong?

  • fb_avatar

    Here's the thing about Jimenez, his numbers don't stack up incredibly favorably to other young Cubs. In about the same number of games, Schwarber was better in every category in high A by about 20%. Rizzo too, at least before cancer issues. Castro, similar numbers, Baez, way more power.
    Jimenez in fact both physically and statistically is a lot like Soler...

  • In reply to Dan Strickland:

    You've also got to remember how much older Bryant & Schwarber were when they were at A ball. They also were more polished than he was. You really can't compare their numbers at each level & extrapolate which will be the better player

  • In reply to Dan Strickland:

    mlb pipeline also said jiminez would be much more likely to reach what people thought solar would be.

  • Wow this post is a dud. No one is commenting.

  • In reply to TD40:

    I've commented a couple times that this thread is approaching the Cubs Den record for comments, held by the Game 7 thread. Losing Eloy and Cease is tough, gaining Quintana is awesome, but this is nothing compared to winning the World Series.. That post should stand forever, and I'll go back and blah, blah, blah filibuster if need be to keep it on top. Maybe I'll run down my all-time favorite songs, one at a time. And dedicate them to all the original masters of Cubs Den.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to TD40:

    Actually Schwarber was only a year older. I didn't mention Bryant cause he was only there for like 2 weeks

  • I'm not as upset about this trade as I was earlier.The cubs can replenish the farm and still compete with the current core.They still have some prospects with upside(amaya,ademan,albertos) they're just years away.I trust theo.Losing torres,cease and jimenez in a year hurts but the objective is to win championships not hoard prospects.Quintana is a good pitcher.

  • In reply to bolla:

    Also: De La Cruz, Maples, Clifton, Alzolay, Paredes, Galindo, Martinez, Burks, Hatch, Little, Lange

  • In reply to TD40:

    none with the upside of jiminez and none as likely to reach that upside. most are pitchers . de la cruz can't stay healthy. trade still makes me want to throw up.

  • In reply to bolla:

    it's much harder now bolla, they didn't have the IFA hard spending cap before, they can't go blow it out and sign 5-7 high priced top fifty guys. they can trade for more money but you can't even do that until july 2, no top fifty guy is going to take a' maybe if we can trade for the money" and most of these deals are really done long before the july 2 date. position player wise this system is almost at pre-epstien level. i remember reading before epstien got here a couple scouts stated cubs had alot of minor league players that could make the major leagues, more than most team., but none where starters much less impact type players. this is where they are now. remember, the last too drafts almost ignored position players. the first position player drafted in 2016 cruz just got demoted back to eugine basically because he can't hit.

  • Trust Theo. Theo knows. Theo is a baseball genius. Theo is the best GM of all time. What Theo has done for the Cubs is mind-blowing amazing. Still hard to believe. So, yes, I trust Theo 1000%

    Can't wait for the games to resume. Very much looking forward to a 2nd half run. Lets enjoy this, fellas!

    Let's Go Cubs!

  • fb_avatar

    I didn't see this coming so I wonder what else is in store for us. I see the Cubs doing at least one more deal before the deadline. I am feeling much better about the Cubs now and I don't see why Q can't have a huge effect in the 2nd half.

  • In reply to Jonathan Friedman:

    One thing I have learned over the last several years is to trust what this FO says to the fan base. Theo said a couple months ago, flat out, that there was an imbalance in the organization and that we would soon deal position prospects for long-term pitching needs. On that note, the FO was questioned about the lack of free agent signings over the winter and their answer was they wanted to stay under the luxury-tax threshold so they could re-evaluate the team mid-season and add salary to address needs. I expect us to make a couple more deals, with the leverage of being able to take on salary (short-term or longer-term). I think the FO is about as likely to give up on this season as I am, which isn't very likely.

    Go Cubs!

  • K Law's trade recap on Insider states that Adzolay and De La Cruz had passed Cease on the Cubs pitching prospect list. Making it easier to deal him. Interesting...

  • In reply to LAX2ORD:

    Maybe Albertos was pretty close too

  • Quintana was in a very small group of cost-controllable starters who may or may not have been available. (Archer, Gray, Cole) I'm amazed we could land him without giving up one of Baez, Happ, or Russell. I know some would rather trade one of those than Eloy, but we get to keep our entire team together, including Schwarb and Almora, while adding a quality pitcher. I really thought Happ would be gone if a trade like this went down. Now it's up to these guys to start hitting and fielding like we've seen before.

  • Arguello, this is your fault, 425 comments and counting. Fortunately, I'm retired and have the time. Be well my friend!

  • Morosi said the cubs still showing interest in sonny gray after the quintana trade.Cubs should offer Schwarber,candelario I'd give them russell back too.

  • In reply to bolla:

    I saw that too. I will stick with my general rule: if a reporter writes an article or a tweet saying the Cubs are going after a certain player, it means the Cubs will never get that player. The trades that actually happen are the ones like Quintana, where the conventional wisdom is that it would never happen because the White Sox would NEVER trade with the Cubs.

  • In reply to Cubswin09:

    So why would this leak if it isn't actually true? Well, the Brewers are rumored to be going after a starting pitcher. Would it be above Theo and Jed to let this little nugget out there to either scare the Brewers off or making the cost even higher? Maybe this is true. But the deals that the Cubs actually pull off come as complete surprises.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cubswin09:

    I think it is more likely that it is Beane who is "leaking" this than the Cubs and the Cubs are just "playing along." I say this because the "leak" benefits Beane more in that it gives him leverage to get more out of the Brewers, or at least justify asking for more. The Cubs agree unhesitatingly because it costs them NOTHING and also potentially drives up the cost for a rival. That is why I give them the "play along" role and Beane the "leaker" role.

  • fb_avatar

    I've seen that on twitter & bleacher report also. I doubt Russell would go back. But Schwarber & Candy make sense.
    Even if (god forbid) Bryant gets hurt, they could put Javy at 3b, Russell SS, Zo 2b, Rizzo 1b. Almora will get CF, Jay LF, Heyward RF.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Wrigley0923:

    Or throw in Almora, Oakland adds Khris Davis.

  • Yea I'd be shocked if the cubs got gray.Farm is pretty much empty so they'd have to package up mlb players they have 0 elite prospects left.I'm worried trading jimenez will sting when heyward continues to be one of the worst signings in cubs history 3 years from now.

  • In reply to bolla:

    lol @ the hyperbole.

Leave a comment