DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Bleacher Bums Forum
HTML https://bbf.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Archives
*****************************************************
#Post#: 297386--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs in '17 - 👑👑👑 Reigning Champions
Edition 👑👑👑
DIR By: Ron
Date: November 13, 2016, 1:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I will be extremely surprised if Baez is traded, for Archer or
anyone else. He is a uniquely gifted player ... whose
combination of skills and instincts are arguably irreplaceable.
As valuable as Archer would be on multiple levels (salivate,
salivate), pitchers represent such a greater risk over a number
of years that I do not believe the Cubs will trade someone like
Baez to get even someone like Archer.
But what do I know?
#Post#: 297393--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs in '17 - 👑👑👑 Reigning Champions
Edition 👑👑👑
DIR By: Reb
Date: November 13, 2016, 2:07 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Rays aren't likely to trade Archer even-up for Baez, so really a
matter of matching up including other Cubs guys. Probably
far-fetched and guessing that Cubs don't much want to trade Baez
anyway.
Most of Baez fWAR value based on defense and if/when his offense
zooms up, he would/will be exceptional WAR value guy. But, keep
in mind that Archer has five years of control--so age difference
not much of a factor aside from Baez' potential improvement.
#Post#: 297441--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs in '17 - 👑👑👑 Reigning Champions
Edition 👑👑👑
DIR By: Jes Beard
Date: November 13, 2016, 9:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Reb link ---
>
> But, keep in mind that Archer has five years of control--so
age difference not much of a factor aside from Baez' potential
improvement.
>
--- End Quote ---
.... and Archer's potential decline.
#Post#: 297461--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs in '17 - 👑👑👑 Reigning Champions
Edition 👑👑👑
DIR By: CUBluejays
Date: November 14, 2016, 10:03 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Archer will be in his age 33 season when is control is up. That
is almost the ideal time to let a pitcher go.
#Post#: 297464--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs in '17 - 👑👑👑 Reigning Champions
Edition 👑👑👑
DIR By: craig
Date: November 14, 2016, 10:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Don't see Tampa being interested in Archer/Baez deal. Seems to
me if they wanted to trade Archer, it would be to get a pile of
high-end prospects.
But Baez has too much present value; the value differential
wouldn't be large enough for them to also leverage multiple
additional high-end prospects besides.
So I think this is a purely academic discussion. (As I guess
everybody understood in the first place....)
#Post#: 297468--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs in '17 - 👑👑👑 Reigning Champions
Edition 👑👑👑
DIR By: davep
Date: November 14, 2016, 11:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I agree that, with the price of starting pitching currently,
especially the price of young, controlled good starting
pitching, Tampa should be able to get a lot more for Archer than
just Baez.
But I believe that the price of starting pitching currently,
especially the price of young, controlled good starting
pitching, is far beyond their value. I believe that this front
office found and took advantage of a market imperfection when
they decided to go after offense rather than defense when
building the core of their team. Just as Tampa should not want
to trade Archer for Baez, I would not want to trade Baez for
Archer. The price is too high, and the risk of injury is too
high.
I am not saying that the front office would not make the trade.
No one knows what this front office would do. I am saying that
I would not make the trade.
#Post#: 297471--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs in '17 - 👑👑👑 Reigning Champions
Edition 👑👑👑
DIR By: ticohans
Date: November 14, 2016, 11:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-2017-free-agent-bargains/
How about Brett Cecil and Rich Hill from this list?
For whatever this front office thinks of Montgomery's starting
potential, Hill would be my #1 target this winter, especially
with Hammel gone.
EDIT: I should say that Rich Hill would be my #1 target given
the front office's apparent unwillingness to pursue a top dollar
closer via FA. Not sure what to make of that, yet. Would love to
reload for 2017 with Jansen or Chapman, but the flip side is
that relievers *are* so enigmatic, that I understand the
reluctance to fork over near 9 figures on a closer, no matter
how good. If we aren't signing a top flight FA, really hoping to
see some serious dough spent signing our core to extensions.
#Post#: 297473--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs in '17 - 👑👑👑 Reigning Champions
Edition 👑👑👑
DIR By: Ron
Date: November 14, 2016, 12:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I think the ostensible reason that the Cubs let Hammel go was
that they want to add young controllable pitching for their
rotation. Rich Hill isn't exactly young. Personally, I could
certainly see offering Hill a two year contract, maybe with some
kind of team-friendly option structured in for a third year.
But, geez, he'll be 37 at the start of next season. Does anyone
think he's likely to be very helpful for more than 2 years, if
that? I'd be surprised if the Cubs pursue him at all, unless he
ends up being still around after the dust has settles and is
available for a bargain deal.
#Post#: 297474--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs in '17 - 👑👑👑 Reigning Champions
Edition 👑👑👑
DIR By: ticohans
Date: November 14, 2016, 12:32 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hill would be a reload of extremely capable veteran talent, a la
John Lackey, only with wider error bars due to his potential
ace-performance and injury concern. A big reason why LA was
actually favored in the NLCS was the presence of a healthy Hill
next to Kershaw. As we saw, when he's on, he's among the best
pitchers in baseball. When your top 4 goes Lester, Arrieta,
Hendricks, Hill... that's nuts. If the goal is another
championship in 2017, Hill would clearly be a strong step in
that direction without requiring a significant long-term
commitment.
Both Arrieta and Lackey will be FA after next year. That means
our 2018 rotation currently looks like Lester, Hendricks, and...
.
I think there is plenty of room for a Hill-type while bringing
along a young SP, especially given Hill and Lackey's ages and
potential for injury. The Cubs' 2016 rotation beat all the odds
in remaining healthy, and we shouldn't count on being so
fortunate in 2017.
#Post#: 297475--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs in '17 - 👑👑👑 Reigning Champions
Edition 👑👑👑
DIR By: CUBluejays
Date: November 14, 2016, 12:37 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Cecil is a lot more interesting than I thought he'd be.
Hill would be interesting because of the the short length of the
contract and possible ace production. The injuries are a
concern and while the length will be short, the AAV won't be
cheap. That could cross him off the list.
Patrick Corbin and Andrew Cashner would be 2 interesting starter
to reliever guys as well.
*****************************************************
Page 25 of 396
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page