Buehrle>Wood Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 With 100 million left the Phillies should consider dumping him. They wont, especially with Amaro, but would hate to see the Cubs backdoor their way to finding an ace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 7, 2014 Author Share Posted August 7, 2014 QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Aug 7, 2014 -> 08:54 AM) I agree, but if they were negotiating a deal, just wonder what the Phils would ask back They are going to ask for half of their farm system, just like they did with the Dodgers, and nothing will happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 One of the Phillies' beat radio reporters was saying they would absolutely have to be blown away with prospects, and that's just not going to happen. The Cubs aren't going to be willing to trade at least one of Baez/Soler/Bryant/Russell AND take on that big of a salary. Probably something along the lines of Baez/Soler (Russell doesn't make as much sense since Rollins' contract kicked in for 2015) AND CJ Edwards and maybe Alcantara, for example. That's a non-starter for the Cubs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 7, 2014 -> 08:00 AM) They are going to ask for half of their farm system, just like they did with the Dodgers, and nothing will happen. And even the Dodgers aren't willing to easily give up Pederson/Seager/Urias, let alone all three of them. One does have to wonder if the calculus is now shifting to trying to dump Crawford or Ethier instead of Kemp now or in the offseason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 If I were the Cubs, I'd strongly consider throwing a couple of those big position prospects their way and trying to get a deal done. It's time for them to take a step forward and they've got the depth to do it without wavering from their course. And if it doesn't work out, they could trade him at any point over the next few years assuming he's healthy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 7, 2014 -> 09:52 AM) If I were the Cubs, I'd strongly consider throwing a couple of those big position prospects their way and trying to get a deal done. It's time for them to take a step forward and they've got the depth to do it without wavering from their course. And if it doesn't work out, they could trade him at any point over the next few years assuming he's healthy. Yes, I agree, they should trade Addison Russell and Kris Bryant for Cole Hamels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 7, 2014 -> 11:13 AM) Yes, I agree, they should trade Addison Russell and Kris Bryant for Cole Hamels. More seriously, what would you say if the Phils asked for Starlin Castro back for him? That clears some money to offset whats being taken on in Hamels's deal and clears SS for Russell if the team has confidence in him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 7, 2014 -> 09:13 AM) Yes, I agree, they should trade Addison Russell and Kris Bryant for Cole Hamels. Not those two. I was thinking Baez+Almora+two small guys and pick up all but about $20m of the contract would be a mutually beneficial situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 7, 2014 -> 10:20 AM) More seriously, what would you say if the Phils asked for Starlin Castro back for him? That clears some money to offset whats being taken on in Hamels's deal and clears SS for Russell if the team has confidence in him. QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 7, 2014 -> 10:21 AM) Not those two. I was thinking Baez+Almora+two small guys and pick up all but about $20m of the contract would be a mutually beneficial situation. Baez and Castro would have to clear Colorado and Arizona though. There's no chance in hell that would happen. Maybe it's something you look to discuss in the offseason, but right now that's as near of an impossibility as anything else you can imagine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 7, 2014 Author Share Posted August 7, 2014 QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 7, 2014 -> 09:52 AM) If I were the Cubs, I'd strongly consider throwing a couple of those big position prospects their way and trying to get a deal done. It's time for them to take a step forward and they've got the depth to do it without wavering from their course. And if it doesn't work out, they could trade him at any point over the next few years assuming he's healthy. I really wouldn't want to depend on the free agent market to bring in pitching. Making a deal makes sense to me too, especially if you can get a guy with some years under control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 The problem is that the Cubs aren't going to get away with trading Almora/Alcantara/McKinney...they're going to have to touch their core four or whatever they call them, core five really with Russell now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harfman77 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 7, 2014 -> 11:31 AM) The problem is that the Cubs aren't going to get away with trading Almora/Alcantara/McKinney...they're going to have to touch their core four or whatever they call them, core five really with Russell now. Alcantara would have to pass through waivers, and that wouldn't happen. I think a Russell/Edwards package plus some filler would make sense for both sides. I am not sure that is enough for Philly though, especially since they have so much dead money in Lee and Howard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 (edited) QUOTE (Eminor3rd @ Aug 7, 2014 -> 09:52 AM) If I were the Cubs, I'd strongly consider throwing a couple of those big position prospects their way and trying to get a deal done. It's time for them to take a step forward and they've got the depth to do it without wavering from their course. And if it doesn't work out, they could trade him at any point over the next few years assuming he's healthy. So the Sox aren't ready to sign major free agents yet, but the Cubs are ready to take on a $100M contract and should give up significant talent do so?? Edited August 7, 2014 by Chicago White Sox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 (edited) The Cubs are not going to trade major prospects for guys making almost $25M per year. If they're willing to pay top dollar, they'll buy their pitching in free agency. Otherwise, they'll trade for pre-arb guys that are both cheap and have a better chance of fitting into their competitive window. Edited August 7, 2014 by Chicago White Sox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Aug 7, 2014 -> 01:42 PM) So the Sox aren't ready to sign major free agents yet, but the Cubs are ready to take on a $100M contract and should give up significant talent do so?? Who said the Sox aren't ready to sign major free agents yet? Not me. They sure as hell weren't ready LAST year, but I have always supported a stance that a team that bottoms out should improve every year. I just don't think James Shields or Max Scherzer are good ideas for us. Also, the Cubs are as flush in positional prospects as they are completely barren in pitching prospects, to the point that trading hitting for pitching is inevitable at some point, it's just a matter of when the right deal comes along. Maybe this is the right deal (though as wite pointed out, waivers make it difficult to execute). Don't you put words in my mouth Mr. Chicago White Sox! (I'm not really mad, in case I sounded like it. I'm just being dramatic) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 The Cubs claimed Hamels for the slight chance that Philly just gives them the contract in my opinion. Probably not going to happen but it's worth a shot. The Cubs will not be giving up top 10 prospects in the org in my opinion though in order to pay Hamels $100 million. They'll pay him the $$. They aren't going to give prospects and pay the $$ though. So Hamels will not be a Cub. Ruben Amaro is the worst GM in baseball though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 (edited) If the Cubs think they can compete with their kids in the next year or two, which would you rather have as an anchor for your staff? Hamels, with security for the next 5 or so years? Or Lester/Scherzer, about the same age as Hamels, but on the open market? I think this was a claim just to see what it would take to get Hamels and to put the idea in Amaro's head for the future. Personally, I think the Cubs should wait...but then again, I don't like the Cubs, so I could care less. Well, actually, I COULD care less. Edited August 7, 2014 by CanOfCorn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harfman77 Posted August 7, 2014 Share Posted August 7, 2014 QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Aug 7, 2014 -> 01:45 PM) The Cubs are not going to trade major prospects for guys making almost $25M per year. If they're willing to pay top dollar, they'll buy their pitching in free agency. Otherwise, they'll trade for pre-arb guys that are both cheap and have a better chance of fitting into their competitive window. Why take a chance on missing in FA when you can get your guy now? Why let the Phillies negotiate with all 29 teams when you can have an exclusive window?They have a surplus of prospects in the minors and need to really start turning things around on the ML level. Their IF is now full and they have 2/3 of their OF that they intend to compete with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 7, 2014 Author Share Posted August 7, 2014 QUOTE (IowaSoxFan @ Aug 7, 2014 -> 03:33 PM) Why take a chance on missing in FA when you can get your guy now? Why let the Phillies negotiate with all 29 teams when you can have an exclusive window?They have a surplus of prospects in the minors and need to really start turning things around on the ML level. Their IF is now full and they have 2/3 of their OF that they intend to compete with. This is the part that gives me pause. You can either HAVE the player, or you can take the chance that one stupid owner is going to decide that he has to have the free agent, and you miss out. We have seen how stupid some of the contracts get. If you can get a guy under your control, that has a positive value. Especially when you factor in the love that players seem to have for the Cubs, you might get a decent discount for a resigning vs the free agent market. If you could save say 10% or even 20% on a guy headed for $200 million contract, isn't that worth a couple of your top prospects? Take David Price for example. With what he said about the Cubs, I get the feeling he would have taken a discount on a long term deal to stay a Cub. If he got a Tanaka type deal (say 7/155) instead of a free agent deal (say more like 8/200, maybe more) is that worth a Soler or someone of that ilk? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.