Winter Leagues Week 11

Good Morning!  Wishing everyone had a good holiday and are staying safe as we enter a new year. The beginning of the holidays usually means an abbreviated schedule in the winter leagues. But Cubs prospects were still able to shine in the past week. For more details, take a look inside.

 

 

 

Mexican Pacific League

Tomateros de Culiacan

On Wednesday, Culiacan tried to keep their playoff hopes alive but stumbled against Mexicali 1-0. Infield prospect Luis Verdugo started at third base and went 1-for-3. Former Cubs minor-leaguer Efren Navarro was at first base and was 1-for-4, while Alberto Baldonado pitched a scoreless ninth and had a strikeout. Mexicali 1 – Culiacan 0

Roberto Clemente League

Criollos de Caguas

Trent Giambrone (photo: Stephanie Lynn)

Trent Giambrone (photo: Stephanie Lynn)

Caguas began the week on Sunday with a good. old-fashioned laugher as they defeated RA12 16-0. Miguel Amaya started at catcher but moved over to first base in the sixth inning. Amaya blasted a Grand Slam home run in the seventh as he went 1-for-4 with a walk, two runs scored, and four RBI. Trent Giambrone was in left field, as he added another three RBI in going 2-for-5 with a run scored. Luis Vazquez entered at shortstop in the seventh inning and was 1-for-1 in his appearance. Caguas 16 – RA12 0

Wednesday saw the Criollos lose only their second game of the season as the bowed to Manati 3-1. Duane Underwood Jr.  started for Creoles and scattered three hits and two walks over three innings, while striking out two batters. Both left fielder Trent Giambrone and catcher Miguel Amaya had the same batting line: drawing two walks while going 0-for-2. Manati 3 – Caguas 1

On Saturday, Caguas got revenge over Manati for their loss on Wednesday by by beating the Athenienses 7-4. Trent Giambrone moved to his more natural position of second base and drove in two in going 2-for-4 with a run scored. Former Cubs pitching prospect Zach Hedges came on in the fifth and pitched 0.2 scoreless innings, yielding two walks. Caguas 7 – Manati 4

Venezuelan Winter League

Caribes de Anzoategui

Tuesday saw Anzoategui lose some ground in the standings, as they fell to Lara 8-6. Centerfielder Rafael Ortega batted second in the lineup and went 5-for-5 with a an RBI and a run scored. Ortega also pegged a runner  at home plate as he tried to score.  Former Cubs prospect Andruw Monasterio was 2-for-4 with a solo home run. Lara 8 – Anzoategui 6

The Caribes were able to make up for Tuesday’s loss by taking it to Lara in a 4-1 victory on Wednesday. Fernando Kelli took over the lead-off slot in the second inning as he played left field and went 1-for-3 with a run scored at the plate. Rafael Ortega remained both in center and second in the lineup and also would go 1-for-3, with a walk and a run scored. Anzoategui 4 – Lara 1

Notes

The Dominican Winter League ended their regular season. There were no current Cubs prospects participating in the DWL.

All games involving the Aragua Tigres of the Venezuelan Winter League this past week were postponed due to COVID-a9 concerns.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • I know it’s winter leagues. Don’t get too high for putting up good #s, etc... But after starting off not doing very well, it’s good to see Giambrone starting to finally get some hits. Do you know if he was just having bad luck, hitting the ball hard but at em, or just plain been bad?

  • fb_avatar

    Thanks Tom. I know it's winter league play but Amaya seems to be doing very well. If, and I know it's just a possibility, the Cubs trade Contreras could he come up and play or would they rather him get every day AB in the minors?
    Also, the Yu rumors to SD persist. I see that they've agreed to terms with Kim and I would push hard for him and one of their 2 top pitchers. We have constantly needed a lead off man and he could maybe fill that role. Thanks for all the work you do.

  • @Darrell H. If the cubs don’t get either Mackenzie gore or 2019 #3 overall pick CJ Abrams at the very least, then I’ve already lost some faith in jed hoyer. Top of the rotation starters with 3 years of control don’t get moved often, and there’s absolutely no reason the cubs need to settle for the 1st decent offer they get. Frankly if this is a salary relief type move for win now guys like Cronenworth and Morejon, then it would make me assume that the ricketts put out a mandate to cut payroll. I see people saying no way they cubs get Mackenzie gore. Well if I’m jed then I’d kindly let the Padres know that we’ll continue to explore our options. The very least I accept is a package led by 2019 #3 overall pick SS CJ Abrams and C Luis Campusano. Anything less and I’ll be officially questioning this post Theo leadership. There’s no reason you have to trade Darvish now unless you get a real offer. This guy did after all go toe to toe with Bauer for the Cy young, and IMO is pitching the best that he has over his entire successful career. Either way the cubs absolutely have to get impact prospects for Darvish. He’s the key trade piece the cubs need to infuse needed talent into their farm system.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    They will get will Myers and Kyle Davies and probably campusano. Gore is a pipe dream that I don’t see them parting with.

  • In reply to Oldno7:

    Zach not Kyle

  • In reply to Oldno7:

    That’s what I’m hearing and that would be an absolute embarrassment. The cubs aren’t going to be real contenders with Zach Davies. Get real prospects if real value for the teams best trace piece, who comes with 3 years of team control. This trade has ricketts twmpering written all over it. It feels like they’re cutting payroll but using their best trade piece as leverage for these payroll cuts. Darvish was the cubs best shot to bring in impact young talent. And what exactly do they think they’re going to win Hendricks and poor mans Hendricks (Davies) as their top starters? Is the goal sustained success anymore, or just not to finish dead last in Major League Baseball? If reports of the underwhelming return are true, then what a disappointing beginning to this Jed/Ricketts led era. This is a tribune type of move adding major league pieces just to keep the team barely relevant enough so fans still show up to the stadium. What’s their big picture plan exactly? If you can’t get real top prospects for darvish, then how do they expect to infuse impact young talent into the organization?

  • In reply to Oldno7:

    Doesn’t even sound like they’re getting Abrams even if they don’t get gore. My question is how has jed not hung up the phone yet. No way you sell Darvish for secondary prospects and mlb depth pieces. I just don’t see anyway they make this deal unless ricketts put out a clear directive to cut payroll

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    Ricketts is the MAN. The Tribune would have kept Darvish, added Kim, rolled out a “competitive” team, filled the seats, and counted the revenue. Ricketts is telling Hoyer to build a winner, get elite prospects, even accept a losing year or two while fans gripe.

  • In reply to cubs09:

    Sure hope you’re right that the cubs are getting “elite prospects”. From the sounds of the rumors there’s plenty of grumblings that the cubs are choosing a quantity of win now players, over a package of prospects. That sounds an awful lot like a tribune move to me. Well just have to agree to disagree on the ricketts. Anyone can look good compared to the business 1st, 2nd and 3rd tribunes ownership, but the ricketts are moving in that direction. Hope the package ends up better then advertised, but it doesn’t sounds like the cubs are making much of a dent on the Padres top prospects. I can understand keeping gore but the cubs should at least get a quantity of top 2-5 Padres prospects. Anything less is taking the 1st reasonable offer they got on Darvish at a time they really didn’t need to settle for the best available deal.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    Ricketts won a World Series. He dropped hundreds of millions of his own money into Wrigley. He maintained a top two payroll for years. It would be truly rare for a big market team to be willing to trade elite players and rebuild. Most fans are stupid and he’ll get a lot of grief at the Cub Convention, but he’s willing to do it. I’m so glad he’s the owner.

  • In reply to cubs09:

    Did ricketts win that WS or was Theo the primary architect? I know who I give the majority of the credit too. Listen I supported the ricketts at 1st and do appreciate that they spent money initially. But they’ve been business 1st, 2nd and 3rd since 2016. The 1st thing Theo criticized when he got here was that the scouting and development staffs were too small. Adding more personnel helped the cubs end the drought in large part, and then ricketts furloughs 300-400 staff members, due to the pandemic. I’ll be eagerly waiting to see whether they increase their staff back up in time. But it sure seems like they’re going back towards some of the tribune ways of business over winning type ownership. There’s a stark contrast lately between what the cubs have spent lately vs the Red Sox, Dodgers or Yankees ownerships.

    My biggest thing is I don’t want to be mired in mediocrity stuck in the middle. If they don’t seek out serious prospects over depth pieces like Davies/cronenworth, then that’s exactly where they’ll end up. Sounds like they don’t have a plan. They need more young talent but won’t rebuild or remain patient in waiting for real returns on one of their best assets. And they won’t make the moves or spends the money to win now. Instead they add depth pieces that will just make them competitive enough to keep the fans in the stands. And would any cubs owner have not taken Theo after he opportunistically fell into the cubs laps. Give Tom credit for selling him on coming to the cubs, but Theo was a celebrity that the entire cubs nation wanted badly in 2012. I’m concerned admittedly about the future direction, or lack of direction of this franchise.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    It was obviously a team effort. But it starts at the top. I remember the Rick Telanders of the world complaining that the Cubs were cheap. Really, it felt like John was the only guy who grasped what the team was doing.

    It's not fair to say fans are "stupid." They just want to win now and in the future and always. But fans have seen so many rebuilds now that they get it.

    I obviously hope and expect a good return for Darvish.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    You are correct Ricketts is a businessman. He doesn't make baseball decisions, but he holds those that do accountable. Theo is gone, Jed is on the clock.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    Good points I actually don’t believe in investing in major, long term deals while rebuilding. As John used to say why add wins to a team that’s not going anywhere anyways. Why add wins to a rebuilding organization that benefits from a higher draft pick? I absolutely love how the cubs were being run until recently. We had an ownership willing to make under the table long term investments such as rebuilding the facilities and adding staff. But the recent cost cutting measures just make me question at times whether those moves were meant to appease Theo, who they made promises too in order to get him to come to Chicago. I honestly worry that they got their WD, and now feel like they don’t have the incentive to invest money in order to win more rings. I hope I’m wrong about that, but for now let’s at least hope that they get somewhat proper value for Darvish. Mackenzie gore maybe a pipe dream but the cubs are after all trading a starter that’s on top of his game right now. I don’t think Darvish has ever commanded his pitches as well as he has the past 1.5 years that he was with the cubs. You gotta trade him but he’s their key trade chip in reinfusing young talents back into this organization.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    I agree Cubs should focus more on prospects. Padres are not giving up CJ Abrams, which I understand.

    I'm hearing Darvish, & Caratini for Myers, Davies, Campusano, & Head.

    I hope the return is like that or better. Hope the Cubs get one of the Padres lower level OF prospects Hassell, Head, Caissie, Mena, or Mears.

    I also thought Wil Myers and Andy Green-Cubs bench coach kinda dislike each other?

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    That’s what I’m hearing naujack and sounds very much like taking the 1st decent offer they got. Campusano better not be by himself you have to assume they get hassell or a promising 18-19 year old prospect. Very underwhelming I can see gore as untouchable, but think CJ Abrams is more then a fair return. Go on the athletic and other sites and cubs fans are pissed off about the overall return, while Padres fans are ecstatic and attempting to justify why their low ball offer is a fair price lol. In my experience a fair grace has both fanbases worried about what they’re giving up. Pads fans are overjoyed they just got snell and Darvish most likely without even giving up the 2 prospects they hoped to hold onto. I just think you can always get a top 50ish prospect for Darvish. What’s the rush hopefully the other prospects are better then what’s being reported, as no cubs trade chip is bringing the same value as Yu.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    I think Abrams is untouchable! I think that is an ok return. I would hope Cubs could get W. Myers contract, plus 4 other players for Darvish and Contreras. Have to see what actually happens.

    Teams are not trading top-top prospects much anymore.

    If Cubs make this trade, they must of talked with most teams about Darvish, & other players on the roster. This is the best deal they could get.

    I know the media brought up last off-season Cubs had interest in Campusano. I assume the Cubs front office likes him, but I hope they end up with at least one or two other prospects in the deal.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    I meant Darvish and Caratini not Contreras

    I hope Cubs can get W. Myers contract, and 4 other players for Darvish, & Caratini. Especially if Cubs don't get Padres top 2 prospects.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    Campusano is reportedly not involved the trade. As a big Darvish supporter over the years I did say I think he makes sense to trade as his age doesn’t fit the cubs current window. Now I hope they don’t trade him as I truly believe they can wait out a better offer if Darvish pitches like an all star (I truly believe he will). I officially hope this trade doesn’t go through, but I think it will. Looks more like a salary dump to me. It’s just that I don’t get why you have to salary dump a guy that’s pitched as well as Darvish has over the past 1.5 years. Bauer will me a lot more expensive.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    I actually like this deal. And I can certainly understand the angst of names coming back wanting more.

    I would argue that Brennan Davis certainly wasn’t a top prospect after his 1st season. We grabbed guys who ooze potential and just haven’t played a high enough level. This excites me. When James Shields was traded no one knew who Tatiana Jr was and that turned out nicely. Preciado sounds similar in nature plus switch hits. And I am not saying he is a Tatis. Just talking from a scouting perspective. He was the #1 international free agent when signed.

    Caissie is an 18 year old who has 100+ mph exit velocities. That is a unicorn. Those guys just don’t exist. Except 1–Ronald Acuna. So for me that is a prospect worth grabbing although young in career he can swing it.

    Mena has star potential — very toolsy. Santana will stick at SS and already slashed .346/.429/.496 an an 18 year old.

    I like the haul and the upside. Do you trade Darvish for Tatis and, for arguments sake, Soler? I have to take that chance at this stage of Cubs baseball. This window is closed. We need a minor reset and grabbing 4 young guys with loads of upside makes sense to me.

  • In reply to cubs09:

    I agree with trading Darvish as his age 35-37 years don’t fit with the cubs current window. The issue is the underwhelming return that is being speculated about by baseball insiders. I’d love to get “elite prospects” but doesn’t sound like that’s happening, and that’s just the problem. Tell AJ preller well explore our options if he won’t even give up their #2 prospect.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    After reading the Cubs may acquire the Padres 4th overall prospect ( a catcher ), I hope this rumor isn't true. One thing the Cubs don't need is another catching prospect with two good catchers on the 40 man roster and three catching prospects in their top 30. I hope Mr. Hoyer knows how to make a fair trade.

  • In reply to ronvet69:

    The cubs aren’t getting any of the pads top 10 prospects. Even campusano apparently is too much for a top of the rotation starter. I hope Jed knows how to scout 18 year old kids, but I don’t see why we had to get back so much uncertainly for a proven starter.

  • fb_avatar

    This is the top of Yu's value. If we trade him we have to get top talent. It all depends on how much SD wants him.

  • Bob nightengale is now reporting that the cubs won’t even be getting pads #4 prospect Luis campusano in the deal. I already hated the deal when he was the headliner. Now I’m just praying that reports are mistaken, and we’re not trading Darvish for Zach Davies and the pads other major league depth pieces. Anxiously dreading this trace getting finalized, and I just hope nightingales sources are as unreliable as they usually are.

  • If reports are true, the players coming to the Cubs seem underwhelming. I'm all for trades, but when trading your best chip, you need to cash in. With that said, I don't really know any of the prospects.

  • Reports are getting Padre prospects # 11, 13, 15, and 16. All in Rookie ball and all 20 and under.

    Reginald Preciado
    Owen Caissie
    Yeison Santana
    Ismael Mena

  • Honestly like most cub fans I’m underwhelmed to say the least not even getting one of their top 5-10 prospects. But to be contrarian I like getting a bunch of 18 year old lottery tickets with more upside anyway over current major league depth piece types like the proposed package of Davies, cronenworth, and/or the undurable Adrian Morejon. Getting a package around those guys would be a tribune move of adding complementary depth pieves just to make this team watchable.

    At least a bunch of young 18 year old kids have the potential to become highly ranked prospects as they climb up the minor league ladder. I’m just shocked though that we had to accept completely unknown commodities, given the high price of starting pitching. I truly thought it should be a given that the cubs get at the very least a teams top2-5 prospects for Darvish. I’ll take young minor leaguers over mlb depth pieces that won’t be meaningful parts of a WS roster anyways. But right now I’m skeptical the former Padres GM jed hoyer didn’t exactly hold a tough line of negotiations with his former team. To me this trade will be a defining early move of hoyers tenure, and let’s see if the guy can evaluate young talent. Again folks I can already see on Twitter that this isn’t a popular move for good reasons. But at least the ricketts and Jed taking the long road, which I’ll admit isn’t something the tribune would do.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    As was a shrill and vocal advocate for a trade, but I have to agree that it isn't exactly what I was anticipating/hoping for. But like you said, maybe these upside players have more potential than we can anticipate. And it is an A's like deal: get what you can.

    What seems really clear to me now is this is a full blown rebuild. I imagine Zach Davies will be flipped at the deadline. Zimbrel, if he has value. And I see little reason to sign Bryant, Baez, and Rizzo.

  • In reply to cubs09:

    You know I felt Darvish warranted a top 50ish prospect at the very least. I’m clearly not alone in that assessment. But I was very concerned that they’d accept a package largely featuring a quantity of scrap average major league starters like cronenworth and Davies. I’ll take a bunch of 18 year old unknowns any day over moves that would just turn the cubs from bad to mediocre. The reality is the cubs still need a big infusion of impact young talent if they wish to be serious competitors. The best news in all of this is that it seems the ricketts are willing to exhibit patience, at the expense of a few more wins in the short term. That’s important in that it means they have a plan other then being mired in mediocrity. I can’t claim to be a fan of the return, but at least I see potential long term upside in all of these unknown kids.

  • In reply to cubs09:

    I don't know about complete rebuild, but it is a salary dump. It could be money for an extension or two. Also, the four teens are highly regarded.

  • In reply to 44slug:

    It's definitely a salary dump. Although he probably got the be he could. It smells like a rebuild to me.

    ESPN prospect analyst broke it down:

    "Bryant has little to no value, Schwarber got non-tendered, Rizzo/Baez on expiring deals, Heyward untradable. Not many options for the Cubs to lower multiple years of payroll & get talent back to improve the base. Not a pure salary dump to me when they get four good prospects."

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    I think it is a good spot for Darvish and Caratini to end up. Darvish if healthy with that team in a pitchers park should have a great season. Caratini, should get more playing time. Plus San Diego has great weather!

    I like the trade, Cubs didn't take money back, except for Z. Davies. That must of hurt the return. Cubs dumped money and got upside.

    Now we have to see if the Cubs will spend any of the savings, this should be the first of multiple moves. Darvish, turned out to be a very good free agent signing.

    I like the idea of getting four lower level guys with upside from the Padres system. They look like four athletic players. Two who play SS, & two OF. Far from an ideal return, but trade looks like a money dump.

    Does this mean the Cubs are going to reload with trades focusing on younger potentially higher upside prospects? Jed has a plan, and is moving forward.

  • Omg. Why does this fell like 2013, but worse?

  • I feel rather deflated. The “haul” seems more like a grab bag. 2024 is the earliest any of these prospects could arrive in the bigs, if at all. I guess Ricketts had Jed by the crystal balls.

  • In reply to IVYADDICT:

    "Deflated," good description. Official notice that the Cubs will irrelevant in 2021.

  • In reply to IVYADDICT:

    Are you blaming Ricketts? I don't think that he makes decisions for Jed and didn't make them for Theo.

  • In reply to 44slug:

    No, he just sets the parameters. He wants guaranteed ROI.

  • I'm very disapointed in Jed Hoyers trade with San Diego. Davies is meh and the four prospects won't be MLB ready for at least three years if they can make an MLB roster.
    I thought Hoyer knew what he was doing when he cut Schwarber, but I was wrong.

  • In reply to ronvet69:

    Also what’s the rush? For a Yu Darvish you can get a package of top 15ish prospects a half year to a full year from now. If Darvish has an all star caliber 1st half, then maybe you get a teams top 2-3 prospects. Hard not to think that jeds ties with SD may have gotten them a bit of a hometown discount. It just stinks that it cost the cubs their best trade asset which they desperately needed to infuse needed young talent back into the farm system.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    Hoyer wouldn't undermine his own org. It's a plan.

  • In reply to kkhiavi:

    Well, at least this trade leaves room for the Cubs to bring up their #2 prospect , a catcher who has looked good in the winter league.

  • Wow, to say I’m underwhelmed would be an understatement. What’s next, Joe Mather batting in the three hole? This is the best Hoyer could do? Not even a pitching prospect like a Weathers? And hey while you’re at it let’s throw Carantini into the deal as well. The “prospects “ they got are so far away from the majors I can’t even watch them develop this year or next. You might as well have a complete rebuild and play for a high draft pick. There is really no reason to watch this team. When I read the names we got in return I thought it was a joke. I don’t think any of the core will even want to resign no matter what the Cubs offer. Just put Rizzo, Baez, Hendricks, Contreras and Bryant out of their misery and trade them. It’s not fair for them to have to go through a season this is turning out to be. I am utterly disgusted.

  • In reply to PhillyCubFan:

    I couldn't agree more ! They should have at least gotten a top five prospect in return.

  • In reply to PhillyCubFan:

    I still don't believe that Marquee has actually showed games that Joe Mather played in!!
    Don't think this is anywhere near the end of the deals...

  • I’d you don’t have The Athletic, here is the first paragraph of Keith Law’s analysis:

    “ The Padres landed a good No. 2 starter in Blake Snell on Sunday, and then added a good No. 1 starter — I’d argue the best starter in the National League in 2020 — on Monday in Yu Darvish. Where Snell cost some very significant prospects, including the second-best prospect in San Diego’s system, Darvish comes mostly as a salary dump, with the Cubs getting some high-upside teenage prospects but nowhere near enough for a pitcher of Darvish’s caliber with three years left on his contract.”

  • In reply to cubs09:

    I saw that what a harsh review of cubs ownership. Can’t say I disagree getting rid of 400 employees, theo Epstein’s large 5th year $10 million salary, and darvisos 21 million sure make it obvious that the ricketts are in cost cutting mode. They may not be the only team furloughing their employees, but they are the only big market team trading their top of the rotation starters for salary relief. Like I said I’ll take prospects over mlb depth pieces in the cubs situation anyday, but the reality is Jed Hoyer doesn’t know what a bunch of 18 year old kids will become either. And that’s just the issue. You don’t trade valuable assets for prospects with so much uncertainty. These kids may bust, become stars, or a couple may become avg depth pieces. But the price of starting pitching warrants a real top 50ish prospect with some level of certainty.

  • Steaming hot garbage. The Cubs got fleeced.

    Since the Cubs signed the Sinclair deal and the Ricketts family have been active supporters of the most divisive and destructive leader this country has ever known, I feel they bring a renewed and deserved curse for the next 100+ years. I’m happy to have cut my lifelong ties with this them. It is an indescribable weight lifted off my shoulders. I can’t explain the relief I felt being detached while watching them sputter their way out of contention last year.

    I’d been a Cubs Den daily reader for nearly a decade. The community here was one of the best things on the internet and so was John Arguello and the team he cultivated. A civil and constructive comment section is hard to come by. But I won’t invest my energy nor spend my money into this organization anymore.

    Just wanted to let you all know that there is a big beautiful world of baseball out there and it is okay to put this team behind you.

  • In reply to good4you:

    Bye bye. That doesn't sound civil or constructive. It is decisive and destructive though.

  • In reply to good4you:

    We won't know for a long time if the Cubs got fleeced.

    I like the Padres uniforms, they may be my favs in all of MLB.
    And I hope they beat the Dodgers.
    Snell and Darvish? Got some pitchers over there...

  • In reply to good4you:

    Why people care about someone's politics and then translate that into if they like them or not is beyond me and is also the reason that we have become hateful and decisive.

    BTW, there is a Ricketts family member that is complete opposite of the brothers, and by all accounts, they love each other very much and are very supportive of each other.

    Rooting for this team has very little to do with whom one supports politically.

  • fb_avatar

    I can't believe the prospects the Cubs got. It seems that the more players that are involved in a trade that just means that they're just players, not one's with high ceilings. I'd rather have two tops prospects, not 3 who are 18 or younger. In addition to that, as much as we need a lead off hitter we didn't get one. Doesn't TB need a Yu Darvish? Did Jed explore all he could get? What do the Cubs players think of the deal--how many will be here when these prospects are ready for the show? Rizzo and Heyward won't be and maybe they'll be flipped. Is this a white flag trade? I'm not opposed to trades, just more in return.

  • In reply to Jonathan Friedman:

    TB would never pay Darvish Dollars.

  • In reply to Jonathan Friedman:

    You couldn’t be more wrong with all due respect. The 4 guys are all high-ceiling guys. Hoyer got the Top 2 international guys from the same class. A 2nd round OF who is 18 with 100 mph+ exit velocity and an 18 year old SS who was dominant in his 1 season. This was a prospect haul. I said it above—Brennan Davis was not one of our Top Prospects after his 1st season. So you can’t expect these guys to fit that bill either. If we get 4 Brennan Davis’ when ranking come out at the end of the ‘21 season everyone in Cubs Den will be celebrating this deal. I am bullish 2 of the 4 become Top 5 Cubs prospects this season.

  • In reply to rbrucato:

    I always value your opinion. I hope you're right about the return. But it still seems like a strange trade. If we're getting rid of 3 years of Darvish, why do we want one year of Davies? This year obviously is a rebuild, what good does Davies do? Are we taking salary for SD? Hoyer has connections in SD. Is he pocketing a big IOU to use down the road? Considering the Bulls really suck, I was hoping for something from the Cubs this winter. 2020 continues to blow big time.

  • In reply to Oneear:

    Davies is still in arb years, last one I think. He made in the 5+ million range so is probably due a raise. I’m guessing at least $3-4 mil maybe a little more. His last raid was around $3 mil. So I see why Padres included him. It’s probably not that Cubs had to have him it’s a combination of the Padres saying take him & his soon to be bigger salary.

    As far as the prospects go, they’re gonna be a while... They’re still babies. We see how long Amaya, Alzolay, Almora, Contreras, & many others have taken to get to the show. Yes, San Diego has a good farm system, but that doesn’t necessarily discern that these top 16 guys acquired automatically slide above our top 5-8 guys. I’m guessing only 1, maybe 2 cracks our top ten when the new rankings appear. None in our top 6. Now if the minors has a season? That could change.

  • In reply to Oneear:

    Well, the Bulls really do suck.

  • fb_avatar

    One more thing. To get Q the Cubs gave up their top hitting prospect and their top pitching prospect. To give up Yu, arguably the 2nd best pitcher in the NL we didn't even get a top 10 prospect from the Padres.

  • In reply to Jonathan Friedman:

    It's a head scratcher for sure. Then toss in a SH catcher with 3 years of ARB who also plays a more than adequate 1B. They're falling off trees......

    Mind numbing.

  • In reply to Cubmitted:

    I like Victory Carrot, but let's not get him mixed up with a MLB caliber starting position player.
    Not a good enough defensively to start at C.
    Doesn't hit enough to start at 1B.

  • In reply to hoffpauir6:

    He's a more than useful player who'll be on an MLB roster for years to come. Who also happens to have 3 years of ARB left.

    So please make your case for giving him away for nothing.

  • In reply to Cubmitted:

    They traded him for high ceiling prospects, not nothing.
    See rbrucato's post above.

  • In reply to hoffpauir6:

    He can start on a lot of teams. He has had Willy blocking him here. He’s not just a Darvish caddie.

  • In reply to Jonathan Friedman:

    Excellent comment, Jonathan. And furthermore, are any of these prospects as good as Pedro Martinez, who has been favorably compared to Trea Turner in speed, arm, fielding, and hitting with 2 years of minor league baseball in which he dominated to back up this claim? And don't forget we gave away Pedro for NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.

  • In reply to Jonathan Friedman:

    Times have changed a bit since that trade, but you are correct. We gave up a ton for Q and a ton for Chapman.

    One thing that skews the return is that we did get a decent SP pitcher in return, something the Sox and Yanks did not get. Davies isn't CY material, but he is a solid #3 or #4 and that has value, thus diminishing the return of young prospects.

  • In reply to IrwinFletcher:

    I'm not sure that it follows to compare trading strategy of recent history with 2020. One should consider the effect of the pandemic on the economy going forward. Not to mention the push for a national financial reset on the horizon. The Cubs have spent generously for a few years, both in players and facilities. Now no one knows even what next year will look like. It's not good business to just ignore the bottom line. Many orgs are gearing up with the future in mind. With others the future is now.

  • Darvish and Caratini for 1 year of Zach Davies and 4 teenagers who've haven't even seen low A ball yet? There isn't even a top 100 prospect among them.

    When I saw Darvish was dealt I was excited to see who was coming back. "Was" being the key word. Then I see Caratini was essentially given away for nothing. Of course they got nothing for Schwarber. Should have been a clue as to what their strategy was. What's the price for Baez, Bryant & Contreras? A bag of shag balls and a vintage Bobblehead or two? Happ on the other hand is still cost effective. Jed might fetch 2 or 3 quality fungo bats in return.

    To the south side we go. Hello White Sox.

    I don't mind a rebuild. When it looks like rebuild. This is a clear indicator they're not even interested in competing for at least the next 4 or 5 years.

  • Any subsequent deal(s) cannot objectively make this less of a salary dump. Neither position, pitcher nor catcher, was blocking emerging talent. If the salary saved is used for an acquisition it doesn’t excuse this pathetic one-sided transaction. Other GMs should be licking their chops if they covet any current Cub. Should the scouting department be a modern day Nostradamus I will happily denounce my rant.

  • fb_avatar

    I was hoping for some young pitching help in any return,but actually I like what we are getting,two high ranked IFA prospects, remember most of the top young prospects come from the IFA, recall Torres and Jimenez, we already have Hernandez coming in January,and we still could bring more this July.
    We didn't lose any position players yet, so we could still add with what we have in pitching, we will be able to compete for the central title,no we probably will not get too far in playoffs,but we still could get to post season.

  • At first look, I did not like the return the Cubs received in this trade. After looking at the stats of the players the Cubs received, it looks like this trade will favor the Cubs for years to come. The Padres paid a lot to sign these players, who came highly rated.
    I would like the Cubs to move Kris Bryant to lower their payroll even more. Change was needed and this trade was necessary. If the Cubs tank for a year or two, so be it !

  • In reply to ronvet69:

    As the shock of what seemed to be an underwhelming return wears off, I am feeling better about it too. Mainly because I think it signals a willingness to accept a few down years to stockpile talent and build a juggernaut. Although I think Bryant, Baez, and Rizzo likely have low trade value, I think it may be possible to get high upside single A prospects for each of them, which would slot into a 2023 or 2024 recurrence. If 2021 is a really bad year, next year's draft choice could fit in. Zach Davies seems like a flip candidate this year. Heck, even Heyward comes off the books after the 2023 season. It is likely to be a couple of grim years.

  • In reply to ronvet69:

    Three of them haven't even played a professional game. The other hasn't seen Low A. It's entirely possible none of them will reach or excel at AA or higher. Happens more often than not.

    If they're going to move their #1 asset for lottery tickets that "might" bear some fruit by '23 or '24 there's no point in resigning any of their soon to be FA's. Back up the truck.

    I still believe Bryant should have been moved after the '19 season when his value was the highest. More than a few have been very critical of the FO over the last several years.

    If they're going to rebuild fine. But not getting at least one highly rated pitching prospect in return is just plain nuts. Especially when we're talking about an organization that hasn't drafted / signed and developed a starting pitcher in 8 years.

  • In reply to Cubmitted:

    Now that I think about it I can't recall a reliever either.

Leave a comment