KeithStone53151

The Cubs are already very susceptible to an injury or two at almost any position hampering their season, even moreso if they make this move.

Machado wants to go back to playing shortstop. That's exactly my point - why Chicago would trade away Russell or Baez, two more than capable SS's with several more years of team control before hitting free agency, to bring back 1 year of Machado at SS before being forced to fork over huge $ to resign him, is craziness. If I'm the Cubs, I'd be much more inclined to include some of their young position player talent in a trade for starting pitching, not for more position player talent that's about to get crazy expensive. The rumor generally makes some degree of sense for both clubs. The Cubs giving up a lot of spare parts, but acquiring a premium player during their window...it's vintage Theo. He tends to make bold, decisive moves for premium players and clearly subscribes to the all-in window theory. He will probably bolt from when things start to suck in a handful of years, but that's besides the point. I don't doubt this rumor at all. It would be really hard to look past a very annoying year to a more promising future if the Cubs made this trade, the obnoxiousness of 2018 may be unbearable.

I highly highly highly doubt we target a top tier FA SP. Nothing would surprise me more than that type of move. I think we roll with the current 4 listed plus an internal option(I say Hader, but someone internal) unless Stearns swings a trade for someone like Archer.

There definitely will be a couple talented guys exposed, I'm sure DS will make good decisions on which guys to expose and keep the higher end talent. A byproduct of improving the talent in the system is occasionally losing some of that talent to rule 5.

Some of those 20 minor leaguers will have to start contributing at the MLB level, otherwise we'll lose some talent. The amount of arms expected to be on the 40 man next year adds ammunition to not loading up the bullpen with too many veterans right now. We'll have to hope a couple of those many options establish themselves this year. I imagine that large group of AAA/MLB likely bullpen arms is where we lose most guys from the 40 man.

I tend to agree with you. There will probably be some prospect consolidation as you noted. We can only carry so many prospects that are 1-2 years away from being ready to help the MLB club, need to fill out a 25 man active roster and have some depth spots. I also don't think it's as bad as many think. Of the guys you listed, there are 1 or 2 that I highly doubt we protect(Lara) and a couple that can absolutely help the MLB club at least as depth guys that could come up if needed(Derby/Ortiz). Will be interesting, I could see us being active with some of those names still this offseason and/or at the deadline to do a bit of consolidation.

The point is that Yelich came up hitting and hasn't stopped. Santana had a great year last year but there's no guarantee his 2017 season is his true ability. As for the Braun/Yelich comparison, Yelich was the better hitter last year and they're basically the same over the last two. Factor in age, defense, and Braun's constant injuries and Yelich is easily the better player. Braun had the worst BABIP of his career last year, that sapped some of his hitting. If you factor in defense it might be close, but Braun is the better hitter. As for Santana, he has mashed at every level of the minors as well and put together a very strong MLB season. It's absolutely fair that he could regress and 2017 isn't his true ability, but given his age and prior body of work it is more likely that he improves on his numbers in 2018 than regresses. If that holds true, he's a far better player than Yelich.

Chacin isn't going to put your beloved Suter in danger of not making the team. And if Suter proves to be one of the team's five best starting candidates, he'll be in the rotation. Chacin is what he is, a proven, durable mid-rotation starter, which is much more than what can be said for Suter, Woodruff, Ventura or Derby. I mean, I like all those guys too, and it is likely that two of the four (Suter and Woodruff) are going to play major roles from day 1 of the season. I think Derby is a darkhorse candidate for the bullpen. He's got a lot of Tyler Thornburg in him. I'm not as high on Ventura, but he's not a bad guy to have around as a depth piece. Also, I agree that the team signing Chacin has nothing to do with their ability or need to sign Walker. I imagine Walker is looking for a 4-year deal, and the Brewers don't want to commit to that many years on a player who isn't exactly young anymore. I liked Walker as well, but Villar or Dubon does offer much, much more upside at that position. I still think Hader has the inside track, but I would expect at least to some degree there to be competition for the final 2 spots in the rotation(yes, Woodruff's spot as well). If either guy looks bad in spring, they might open in CS with Suter or Wilkerson or whoever is lighting up ST taking their spot. The other 3 guys are pretty much locked into rotation spots no matter what. I have our payroll at 70-73 million with arbitration estimates and not including Boone Logan. Assuming he signs for maybe 3-5 million at most, we still have plenty of room to bring in someone like Walker if we choose. It just wouldn't be prudent to bring in a 2b at his age on a 4 year deal with the guys we have in the pipeline. I also think our payroll in contending years could be more than the $110 million we maxed out at 5 years ago. I think shared revenue especially and our Brewers revenue likely have increased to the point that we can afford to bump payroll higher in given years without losing money.

This. Especially with it being front loaded. I don't think Chacin is likely to be traded at the deadline if we are in contention. If he posts a sub 4 era and 180 innings, someone will be interested in 1 year of Chacin for probably a #101-200 prospect or a couple young fliers...possibly more if it's closer to the low 3s ERA that he posted from June forward this past year. Either way, the contract would be gone and space would be cleared for our AA/AAA pitching prospects. Injuries happen, that's how guys of the Wilkerson/Suter/Jungmann caliber should get chances in the rotation. You don't opt to not sign an established #3/4 starter because one of these fringe MLB/AAA guys from a stuff standpoint might play up to a #4/5 starter for league minimum. That isn't a winning formula.

I don't think anyone's disagreeing he's a big question mark, regardless if that's because of health or anything else. That's why he's a wild card. I tend to believe Guerra was more of a 1 year wonder than he all of a sudden found dynamic stuff at his age. It will be nice to have him in spring in case he's back to hitting mid 90s, but I'm not optimistic. He might work OK out of the bullpen if his fastball can play up, but I'm not so sure he can start at this level.

Reminder, Hader and Woodruff at age 23/24 are not finished products. They are young enough that they can still improve their command and their stuff. And Woodruff tossed nearly 160 innings in 2016, his innings might be limited to around 200...which I imagine won't be much of a limitation. It would be helpful to be a bit open-minded about what these guys could do beyond 2018.

What??? Sometime in September, Briggs made a comment along those lines. I'd say the idea of trading Woodruff now is about as ridiculous as that comment from September.

Chacin was one of only 23 pitchers in all of MLB last season to throw 180 innings, with an ERA better than league average. I think the odds of any of Guerra, Jungmann, Suter, Wilkerson, Ventura or Derby matching those numbers are extremely low. Many on this board are all for giving young players a chance, but you can't have a team full of rookies. We are giving looks to higher upside guys like Hader/Woodruff in the rotation this year. 2 is plenty. You need to weigh giving young pitchers a chance against potentially devastating the bullpen if none of the 3 work out. And most of the guys you mentioned are really fringe #5 starters at best. Chacin is better than any of them could hope to be on their best day. Chacin gives us 3 guys that you can hope/expect to throw at least 6 innings most of the time, allowing you to hope for the best with Woodruff/Hader and not be in too much trouble if they have very short outings.

I'd say Nelson has shown glimpses of being in that Gallardo in his prime tier. Gallardo was never an ace in my opinion, he was always more of a very good #2 starter or a #1b type guy. Nelson was very good this year and had glimpses of getting to that caliber in other years, but was not consistent enough at that level to establish himself in that tier. And agreed with many other posters that even on his best day, he was never as good as Ben Sheets.

Yelich's career numbers are better than anything Santana did prior to last year. His bat blows Broxton's out of the water. And at this point he's probably equal to or better than Braun. I really didn't think he was anything special either until I looked up his numbers. He's the high AVG, high OBP hitter this offense could really use and he's got 4 years of (albeit somewhat expensive) control left. This is incredibly misleading(to the point of being meaningless) considering Santana had somewhat sporadic PA as a 22 year old and then dealt with a nagging should in his age 23 season(which he still posted near 800 OPS). Saying Yelich's career numbers are better than Santana's rookie year of sporadic PA and an injury plagued year is...yeah meaningless. Based on Santana's most recent season and minor league numbers against Yelich's track record, Santana is the more productive player at the plate and figures to be going forward. And no, Yelich is not equal to or better than Braun with the bat. Not yet. That said, Yelich would most likely be an improvement in CF this year. I'd prefer to see the Brewers give our young players a look rather than trade for Yelich. Brinson has a very real chance of being better than Yelich going forward, he absolutely will be better defensively and is younger/cheaper. Phillips has a chance to be equally productive as he has more power, and will also be better defensively. Broxton is likely traded. The Brewers will never be a team where we are completely set with stud players at every position. We always need to be bringing up cost-controlled talent as it develops, and cycling out players as they approach FA. Trading prospects for established players at every position not only drains the farm of talent, but it blocks off roster space and doesn't allow the talent we retain to continue development at the MLB level. That generally will lead to a "window" situation rather than being consistently competitive.

Have you bothered to look at Susac's history or did you just lock in on his 2017 injury riddled season? 1 catcher (Susac or Bandy most likely) will be traded since they're not carrying 5 heading into the season but thinking Bandy is comfortably sitting on the 40 while Susac is the biggest pile of deuce you've ever seen is absurd. How do we allow this guy to keep talking down to people like this... not to mention he isnt even correct. Just mouthy arrogant condescending and rude... post after post. Despite the tone(and really I don't find it that bad considering what you wrote previously), he makes good points about Susac. The guy was a very solid hitter most of his career in the minors, and is also very solid at blocking pitches. While he had a down year at the plate last year(his injury issues in 2017 have been well documented), he improved his CS rate significantly. Catchers are closer to pitchers than position players from a development standpoint as so much goes into developing a good catcher on the defensive side. You, like many people, have subscribed to the "what have you done for me lately" evaluation philosophy. You probably saw some lousy at bats in Milwaukee and subpar hitting numbers in Colorado Springs...and ignored his prior body of work and threw a bunch of very harsh labels at him. Susac probably has an inside track on that final 40 man spot given he has an option. The loser of Bandy vs Vogt for the 2nd catcher spot will likely be traded or DFA'd, while Susac opens in CS as a backup in case of injury. It also, based on the body of work I outlined above, would not be surprising for Susac to bounce back from an injury riddled season and provide some value to the big league club next year.

Yankees are reportedly zeroing in on Cole but I wouldn't put it past them. Price for Archer is high, or he'd be a Cub by now. I think they'd rather hold on to him than lower their price. The Cubs don't have the pieces necessary to land Archer. They are likely looking for prospects in return, otherwise they have no reason to trade a guy with 4 years of team control. guys they'd be getting from the Cubs would be mlb players that have maybe 4 years of team control and aren't as valuable.

I would think these threads should stay in the rumors section until official. That said, I like the target. Hopefully the price is right. Throws mid 90s heat with mid 80s slider. Slider 50-60% of the time. He's much better against lefties, probably will be a LOOGY to some degree. It will be nice having him and likely suter as lefty pen options. I saw the joking comment about this tabbing hader for the rotation. I would think this is an indicator to some degree that he is more likely to end up in the rotation.

Agreed, I think this may be a direct replacement for Drake. Not sure if this affects Hader at all (as far as bumping him to the rotation or staying in the pen). I'm hopeful it does. Hader is more than a LOOGY, but having Logan and likely Suter in the pen gives us less need for a 3rd lefty in the pen. But we definitely could roll 3 lefties in the pen, so you're right there's no guarantee that signing this guy moves Hader to the rotation. But I would call it an indictator and increases that likelihood.

Based on that, I would like to think a 1 year deal, either minor league or a 2-3 guaranteed would make this a reasonable deal. It will definitely be nice having a LOOGY to face guys like Rizzo/Votto/Carpenter etc late in games. If he signs a major league deal, this must be the guy that punts Drake from the 40.

I saw Mass Haas retweeted this. Anybody familiar with this guy? Fangraphs show he throws 93-94 FB and 83-85 slider, while throwing the slider 50-60% of the time. Career splits would indicate he's primarily a LOOGY. Sounds good to me on a low cost deal. Yet another indicator that Hader is bound for the rotation.

I feel like Drake is likely to be the first guy punted if/when we bring in another reliever. Susac has an option, so it's more likely that Bandy is a 40 man casualty before Susac.

No idea? None of you seem to want to pay a bullpen guy what MARKET VALUE dictates, despite the huge need we have. You also don't want to pay an ace MARKET VALUE for their services. Also you don't want to trade any prospects because heaven forbid Lewis Brinson and Corbin Burnes are the second coming of Jesus Christ. Thus we have two options: 1) throw guys out there that have never seen a major league batter and pray for the best, 2) sign some decent mid rotation starters cheap like Chacin and keep Hader in the bullpen where he has been torching teams in high leverage situations. Can't have it both ways. Unless of course you'd rather we just resign Jhan Marinez, Neftali Feliz, Oliver Drake types and watch them throw leads away like they're going out of style. I say let it happen organically with Hader with regards to starting. But to start 2018 he's in the pen locking it down with Knebel. That rant had absolutely nothing to do with debating whether a RP is of greater value than SP. Look no further than what the free market dictates for high end relief vs high end SP. Compare Chapman's contract to what Kershaw is making. Chapman is getting about half of what Kershaw is getting, and that's before Kershaw hits free agency and increases his pay...

The smart money has to be on Drake, but other obvious options include Baker, Webb, or a catcher.

Couple points here. Since when is the 8th inning more high leverage than the first 3 innings? 8th inning is only high leverage it certain situations, the first 3 innings are always high leverage. In fact, there are plenty of times the "set-up man" is used just to get some work, or in 2-3 run leads. Still valuable, of course, but let's not pretend every appearance is high leverage. Secondly, a really good starting pitcher is more valuable than a late inning reliever for the obvious reason. There are fewer really good SP than really good relief pitchers. Look at just the very recent past, Knebel, Hader, Swarzak, Thornburg, Jeffress, and Smith. I mean, that's only the last two seasons! Hey, I have no dog in this fight. I would like to see Hader start, but if they keep him in pen because they think that's best...I'm fine with that. Doesn't mean he can't get his chance to start next season or whenever. The question at hand is the uncertainty how he would do as a SP. That's a fair debate, and many have been having it. But it's not about whether a great late inning guy is more valuable than a great SP. I tend to agree with most of this. I'm of the camp that Hader can and should get a chance to start, and I think he'll succeed. But there's room for debate there for sure. But great SP versus great RP isn't a debate.