You know you want him, Get it done Jim!
by BelieveinBlue2314 on Nov 11, 2009 2:07 PM CST
Email
PrintThe Tigers are letting teams know that Illinois native Curtis Granderson is available. I think he fits all of our needs, and has made comments before about his love of Chicago. Please Jim, I dont ask for much but get this done he is perfect. I understand he only hit .249, but he had his lowest average since 2004, he also might be out of our price range but is a good leader and he is the perfect fit as a leadoff hitter. Thoughts?
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
267 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
forgot to add a link...
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/11/curtis-granderson-becomes-available.html
"God watches over drunks and third baseman."- Leo Durocher
by BelieveinBlue2314 on Nov 11, 2009 2:09 PM CST reply actions
I also want Granderson
Pleaseeeeee get er done Hendry!
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
Yep -
This is a no-brainer. Curtis Granderson fits the Cubs needs perfectly as a CF, #5 hitter, Chicagoan with great attitude, athletic, young.
Plus, we match well with Detroit, able to give up young, inexpensive players at SS and closer.
Is he traded yet?
He's a lead-off hitter in exactly the same way
that Soriano has been a lead-off hitter.
Is he traded yet?
I'm not saying they're wrong, but that blurb is lacking in data or explanation
Namely, how do they define “productive hitter”?
I just don't get the feeling
that the Cubs will trade Marmol in a package for Granderson (particularly after the comments today about not spending heavily on the pen). So … that means, are they willing to take an Angel Guzman as a key part of a deal, or are we parting with elite talent? I’m not against parting with Cashner or Jay Jackson in a deal, but the question then becomes, what’s next after that? Castro? I mean … I can’t see Dombrowski taking someone like Darwin Barney, and I’m not sure Ryan Theriot does the trick.
This will be an interesting one to see how it plays out. But now that there seems to be legs to this (Joel Sherman), it’s something to ponder some more. I still wonder if they do pull the trigger, but it’s more than simply speculation from Lynn Henning now.
Bad Idea
Not to spend on the pen! I know many here don’t agree with me and that’s fine. I said we needed help last year and we did nothing. Our pen was awful imo. Our pen is still not solid and it will be an achilles’ heel next year if we think were gonna mix and match.
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
Well
to be fair, I should’ve been clearer. The Heyman article only said Hendry wouldn’t spend on a closer. I think they may go after a setup arm to go with the expected Grabow signing.
That said, maybe Granderson gets the Cubs to change their mind. The ideal scenario for the Tigers is probably to get back some combination of an OF, arm, shortstop.
Heilman has already been traded....
and Gregg is a free agent, so the Cubs can’t trade him. Theriot, I would part with, but if they do that, then Starlin Castro is completely, 100% off the table, which is probably the case anyway. The other guy that I would not give up, even if it kills the deal, is Marmol. I think he is going to be the Cubs’ best closer since Lee Smith, and he’s young enough to give the Cubs at least as many years as Smith did. You look at all the other quality closers the Cubs have had since then: Mitch Williams, Randy Myers, Rod Beck, Tom Gordon, Joe Borowski, Kerry Wood. They got one good year out of all of those guys, and that was it. I would not risk making that same mistake with Marmol.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
I think you could make an argument that spending on the pen...
has not worked out that well for the Cubs recently. Howry and Eyre were good for a year and then trailed off.
And 2009’s two worst (arguably, perhaps) relievers were the two “expensive” acquisitions: Gregg and Heilman.
If Marmol is the closer and Guzman and Grabow are the two primary set-up guys, I don’t see the purpose in “spending” much on a 4th or 5th best reliever.
Of course, if the Cubs could get a quality bullpen arm, it should always be looked at… but I’m not sure throwing money at the bullpen is the best plan.
I think he calls them "nothing".
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Nov 12, 2009 3:21 PM CST up reply actions
What if they took Willis and Guillen's contract?
I’ll bet $24 million of payroll relief gets you Vitters instead of Castro
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Um, maybe, I guess.
But we know the Cubs are in no position to take on that kind of salary, or players that are that useless to us (in one case because he’s a DH / 1b, in the other case because he’s not a major league player anymore).
That just doesn’t strike me as a realistic scenario.
Why not though
The way I see it the Tigers have the following contracts that suck
Magglio- $18 in 2010, $15 in 2011
Guillen- $13 in 2010 and 2011
Bonderman- $12.5 million in 2010
Willis- $12 million in 2010
Robertson- $10 million in 2010
Ricketts can’t swallow two of those for one season? The freaking Marlins manage to do it. With Guillen you actually get your starting 1B in 2011 if you want. I suppose of the pitchers Bonderman is the most likely to be something, but really for at least 4 years of Granderson I don’t see how taking a one year hit is that hard. After that you lose Lee, Lilly, Bonderman which is what $33 million off the books?
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
by nji232 on Nov 12, 2009 10:18 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Thanks for getting these #s in the thread.
Magg’s 2011 is an option that can be avoided if he doesn’t play enough, right?
Is he traded yet?
Is Granderson worth that?
Let’s say you take on an extra $26M by taking Guillen with Granderson.
Granderson himself is owed $24M over the next 3 years, which means your opportunity cost for Granderson would be $50M for 3 years, plus whatever prospects you’re sending back. (Guillen is essentially worthless, so he adds no value to the trade). I like Granderson a lot, but I wouldn’t pay $50M for 3 years of his service.
I just don’t see how that makes any sense for the Cubs.
I forgot about Granderson's buyout
So the opportunity cost for him would be $52 / 3 years or $63M / 4 years.
I don't see how Guillen is worthless
HIs projected wOBA next year is .350. He can play left, first, and third, probably right in a pinch. Even if he sucks in the field he is a left handed Jake fox. Given the fact that we have injury prone guys (or prone to missing random amounts of games with little things) at those positions I think he would be very valuable next season in that role and you have your 2011 starting first baseman.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Putting aside the question of Guillen's value
…and he was awful last year, the bigger question is, would Guillen accept a trade if he wasn’t going to play everyday?
There’s clearly no spot for him on this team except as a role-player. He’s a 5-and-10 guy so he has a full NTC.
He's only a role player in Detroit.
All things being equal, where would you rather be?
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
I should also add, Lee's contract is up
in 2010, so he could target earning the first base spot for 2011 before he hits free agency.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
Guillen is the captain of the team and plays almost every day
How is he a role player exactly? He was their everyday DH while he was getting healthy, and once they traded for Huff he moved to first base.
He plays multiple positions, but he plays almost every day for them.
I thought the Tigers believe he's no longer suited
for every day play. I could be wrong, but I also understood:
- He only played 2 games in 2009 at first base.
- He DH’d because Mags was awful early and middle of the season.
- Cabrera is the first baseman and Mags will need more time at DH’s.
-Guillen mostly played LF and split time in LF/DH with Thames.
Sorry, though, I meant he’s expected to be a role player.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
Whoops, and I typed "first base" when I meant "left field"
I thought they just didn’t expect him to play in the field every day, but that since the DH slot was open that wasn’t a big deal. Maybe I’m wrong – that’s 100% possible.
Wow I didn't know he was 10-5
I can’t believe he’s been in Detroit that long. That probably complicates things, I don’t see why he would accept coming here to ride the bench.
My point remains though- offering them some major salary relief might lower a bit how much we give up. Basically Vitters instead of Castro.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
I think
we could be competitive without putting Castro in a deal, but it would require multiple high level talents, which makes me wary.
That's fair.
I think that Granderson will be very, very costly and he carries a fair bit of risk (bad luck last year aside, he’s K rate has gone up every year). If we can do that without giving up core guys like Castro then I’m all for it, but I share your concern about overpaying for him.
I'm bothered by Granderson
At his best, he was, for me, a plus-platoon guy. Borderline passable against lefties. That hasn’t improved. Unless I’m forgetting the numbers, I think his effectiveness against fastballs has slipped. Maybe he can pick it back up to 08 levels. There’s just some little things that bother me.
This isn’t to say he’s a bad player. He’s probably as decent a fit as there is this offseason. It’s simply to say that I’m still not sure I go “all-in” for him. I think I’d be willing to leverage a big offer (perhaps Cashner/Hak-ju Lee as the main assets, plus some lesser chips … still would be wary about that, but you gotta give something to get something), but going heavy on him, not my flavor.
I'm wary about the lefty thing too.
Granderson’s average against lefties sucked last year. However, depending on what his asking price is, that might mean that we re-sign Reed Johnson. If they brought Granderson here, you have a CF and RF (Dome) who are below average, at best, against lefties. That creates a role for Reed right there. And even on days where we face righties, they will need to sit Soriano at times too. If Reed is willing to play the super-sub outfielder role, I bet he still plays at least 130 games in 2010 for the Cubs, and a lot of those would be starts. Plus, Reed is another guy who seems to “get” playing for the Cubs. IMO, we have let too many guys like that get away too easily in recent years. The Cubs need to find a way to keep Reed.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
Oh boy...
I take that to mean the GMs told them “No ^%% way!” to deals involving Bonderman and Willis. You can probably take the Tigers off the table as a destination for Bradley with this snippet.
Take Bonderman & Granderson
Offer Bradley & almost whatever it takes plus 4 milion next year. You remove a clubhouse cancer and add a long term CF option. The payroll definately stings next year but 2011 the Cubs will be in good shape. I got $20 towards the deal, tell me where to send the money Jim. Get it done!
by Cubsfan Waveland on Nov 11, 2009 3:13 PM CST up reply actions
I didn't take it that way.
If Granderson is available… wouldn’t that mean they would have room for Bradley?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
but I think Damen
is suggesting they won’t take Bradley’s contract. They might take Bradley if we pay for him, but it looks like they need to cut costs.
Is he traded yet?
Correct...
I don’t think we’re having this conversation if they didn’t need to trim salary, and thought at this point that Bonderman, Willis, and/or Ordonez could be moved.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 11, 2009 4:15 PM CST up reply actions
Well...
… if the Cubs took Ordonez, that would nearly equalize the dollars ($18m due to Ordonez, $21m due to Bradley). If the Cubs took the extra $3m (which they could probably do), I think that could still work.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
For almost the same cost, the could take Guillen and Bonderman.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
It doesn't equalize. Both teams are worried about 2010's budget
Sure the amounts are the same, but which team is going to take on Ordonez’s salary for 2010? If the Tigers want to cut costs for 2010, they won’t want to do it, and we know the Cubs don’t have the payroll room to take that on next year.
They might have to...
… if they want to get rid of Bradley.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
not necessarily
i’m not sure how much they trust ryan raburn to man centerfield. i think they would be actively searching for a cf, and they seem intent on giving raburn a starting spot in lf next year.
i bet if we made a deal
giving them Fox, jackson and 2 more prospects would get this done, the tigers need to get rid of payroll after bad attendance once again this year.
"God watches over drunks and third baseman."- Leo Durocher
by BelieveinBlue2314 on Nov 11, 2009 2:20 PM CST reply actions
I would not think twice about a deal like that.
But don’t you think another team would put together a better package than that?
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
i would do that too
"God watches over drunks and third baseman."- Leo Durocher
by BelieveinBlue2314 on Nov 11, 2009 2:31 PM CST up reply actions
yes i agree
but Granderson has a no trade clause doesnt he?
"God watches over drunks and third baseman."- Leo Durocher
by BelieveinBlue2314 on Nov 11, 2009 2:30 PM CST up reply actions
I think it is more likely to take
Cashner, Marshall & Guzman or something like that. They are hardly going to do it for Fox & Jackson.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 11, 2009 2:43 PM CST up reply actions
I'd do that in a second.
I’ve never been sold on Marshall. Guzman is nice, but replaceable. Cashner hurts a little, but it’s a gamble I’d be willing to take.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
Well it might take a good deal more
Hard to say beyond it would not be for Fox & Jackson. I would however assume that the Tigers will want pitching.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 11, 2009 3:09 PM CST up reply actions
NL GOLD Glove Winners
No Cubbies!!
Molina C
Wainwright P
A. Gonzalez 1b
Hudson 2b
Rollins SS
Zimmerman 3b
Kemp OF
Bourn OF
Kemp OF
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
micheal bourn
i think i just threw up in my mouth…
"God watches over drunks and third baseman."- Leo Durocher
by BelieveinBlue2314 on Nov 11, 2009 2:31 PM CST up reply actions
Damn... that Kemp guy covers a lot of ground out there...
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
You know Orlando Hudson only made...
…$1.1 million dollars more than Miles last year. AND only asked for a one year deal.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
another player i would love to see in blue pinstripes
"God watches over drunks and third baseman."- Leo Durocher
by BelieveinBlue2314 on Nov 11, 2009 2:49 PM CST up reply actions
I discount Gold Gloves ever since
Rafael Palmeiro won for 1B in the AL in 1999.
From Wikipedia “His 1999 Gold Glove Award is regarded by many as controversial, because he won the award despite playing only 28 games at first base that season. He played most of his games that year as a designated hitter.”
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 11, 2009 4:43 PM CST up reply actions
BAM! Greatest tidbit of the day.
Thanks RB. This goes to show there is just no justice in this world.
Thanks
One of my favorite WTF!?! moments in baseball. MLB Managers vote for Gold Glove awards at the end of the season. Looks like a “check the box” drill sometimes.
by RiskyBusiness on Nov 11, 2009 4:52 PM CST up reply actions
I would LOVE CGrand on the Cubs
He’s been one of my favorite players for a while now. The Tigers have traditionally taken stupid trades with bad pitching… maybe they’d go for Smarsh/Gorz, a middle infielder and somebody like Colvin… or take a rider on Kosuke… as much as I like Dome, he might be better trade bait than a roster spot right now.
really curious
what trades in Dombrowski’s tenure would be classified as flat out stupid and “bad pitching”? Before you say Willis, everyone understood that was the price to pay for landing Miguel Cabrera. Can’t blame them all that much for that.
Toonster...
The acquisition of Willis may have been part of the Cabrera deal, but giving him an extension was not. There were red flags abound at the time, so in this instance, yes, Dombroski was stupid.
by Damen Jackson on Nov 11, 2009 4:17 PM CST up reply actions
fair
don’t disagree, he’s given some awful deals. i was just referencing the op’s comment about stupid trades
Leyland...
…and Bradley would get along just swimmingly.
Don’t see this happening.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
Can someone tell me why no one seems to want Ankiel on this team?
He’s a great defender with an amazing arm, has shown the ability to hit 25 home runs in a season with an acceptable average, and could be had on the cheap (or so it seems).
I know I am probably missing something about him, but what?
He was way below average at the plate this year.
I’m no expert, but considering he is a converted pitcher and that his batting abilities might’ve been a fluke during the previous two seasons, he would be a liability at the plate. That would be my issue with him.
He will be 30 and a line of .231 / .285 / .387 in 2009
Other than maybe as a cheap bench player, I don’t think anyone sees him as the answer to anything.
I don't want a bad player
He hit like a pitcher last season, he isn’t good in center.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
look at his numbers last season
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Nov 11, 2009 6:10 PM CST up reply actions
To make Bradley part of a deal, more payroll would probably have to be taken.
Bonderman alone is probably not enough of a reason for the Tigers to part with Granderson as Bonderman is only a 2010 albatross.
Bonderm and & Willis or Bonderman and Guillen would free up enough space that they’d probably consider taking Bradley & Miles and a combination of cost controlled players.
Bonderman, Guillen & Granderson combine as follows:
2010: 31M (All Three)
2011: 21.25M (Guillen & Granderson)
2012 10M (Granderson)
Bradley/Miles are:
2010: 11.7
2011: 12 (just bradley)
Factor in some of the contracts coming off this deal will replace or who just won’t be replaced (Harden, 7M, Gregg, 4.2M, Chad Fox .5M, Luis Vizcaino 3.5M, Marquis .875M, Gathright, .8M – 16.875 in dead money) and there’s still money in the budget for a slight payroll increase and to re-sign Johnson, add to bullpen, give raises, etc.
The Cubs can make it work if they want it.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
by N Oakley on Nov 11, 2009 4:50 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Very Nice Thought Out Post
Rec’d
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
Under that situation, why resign Johnson?
Fuld is backup OF. Johnson’s 3 million or so seems redundant.
I understand your point.
But Fuld won’t hit 12-17 HR per season. I’m not saying $3 million=12-17 HR, but it’s something Fuld won’t provide.
too many Cubs fans
overvalue Reed Johnson. Up to 17 HRs? Come on. And off course he has a better chance of hitting for power than Sam Fuld! I have a better chance of hitting for power than Fuld.
Based on what?
Seriously, what makes you think Reed Johnson, in a backup role, will come anywhere near 12-17 home runs?
Steroids.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Nov 12, 2009 6:23 PM CST up reply actions
He did hit 12 in '06.
Maybe he’s got another season like that in him the further out he gets from his back surgery.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
And he's hit 12 HR's combined in the three years since then...
Sure, he COULD hit 12 HR’s next year. But expecting that type of production out of him is just flat out absurd.
Yeah, I guess you shouldn't expect it...
…but I don’t really look for home runs out of a player like RJ anyway.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
I was thinking Fox would be a big part of any trade.
UM guy with local ties, a lesser gloved Inge type would fill some of the holes in Detroit and I don’t see Fuld as a 4th OF alone.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
Johnson is the much better player between him and Fuld
If Fuld gets significant playing time in 2010 then the Cubs are in trouble.
Is Johnson that much better than Fuld ...
that he’s worth the difference in salaries? I don’t think so — and I’m not a big Fuld fan. I also read somewhere that Reed wants a multi-year deal (the Trib, Bruce Levine’s blog?).
Look, Reed’s a great guy and a decent player. But the Cubs shouldn’t spend millions on him with their already tight budget.
You're talking probably 2-3M for Reed Johnson
If he’s even a half of a win better, then you’ve gotten your money’s worth (and I think he would be, provided he can stay healthy).
Fuld will hit well below league average for whatever position he plays.
Is anyone up on Guillen's ability to play IF?
I know it wouldn’t be good, but is it possible? If we send Theriot in the deal, could we live with Guillen until Castro is ready?
Is he traded yet?
I think Guillen has aged and expanded beyond middle IF
He can play some third, first, LF and RF and be a really good bat off the bench.
Someone who understands UZR beyond me can respond better, but there are reasons he last played SS in Detroit in 2007, and it’s not because Adam Everett is AWESOME (he’s not).
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
While I actually think a deal like this could work
the one downside and I think it would prevent it is that this is 100% salary dump for the Tigers. They are not getting any young players. It would not be an easy sell to the fans when dumping Granderson.
If the Tigers do move Granderson, I think they would really look for young players.
Oh, I figured this was the salary structure
not the full trade. We’d obviously need to put in some players there, too.
Is he traded yet?
Absolutely, a couple of cost controlled players
with upside like Marshall, Fox, and another young arm would be needed as well.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
Good post
We take a big hit next year but it will provide the relief the Tigers need and it might get the deal done. I would say Johnson is not need under this scenario, so save his 3 million.
by Cubsfan Waveland on Nov 12, 2009 11:53 AM CST up reply actions
there are a lot of vague fan post titles around here lately
this couldve been about The Hamburgler for all we know
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
I really think
that for us to have a shot in the deal, we’re going to have to part with Cashner. They’ve shown a willingness to throw young arms in there, so he could be in the pen mix with them along with Perry.
Question becomes, how much further are we willing to go, and how much do they want? Because I’m hardpressed to see one B level prospect and a bunch of lesser guys being enough. I’m also hardpressed to see Hendry move Marmol, and I’m not real sure Theriot does the trick (with arbitration, the salary saved won’t be by much).
Castro should be the one untouchable in the system. After that, in terms of a prospect laden deal, we could compete, but we don’t necessarily fit all that well, unless they are willing to take high upside lower level guys to pair with some safer floor guys at the top.
I think moving Marmol makes a lot of sense,
especially because it seems to me like Jim should be exploring trading Bradley for a closer. In this economy, there have to be teams looking at closers making 8-12 M and thinking that’s the place to pare back. When we’ve even heard rumors of Papelbon and Nathan potentially being moved, Coco Cordero and Kerry Wood seem like players that could be involved in a MB deal. Perhaps the Toronto-Overbay three way trade could work with Cleveland and Wood.
Is he traded yet?
I think
that the value of Marmol to the Tigers, specifically, might not be as great, due to
a) his inconsistency last year
b) that he’s an arbitration eligible guy
c) they are likely looking at setup possibilities, with Zumaya slated to probably close and Perry in the mix to setup.
The difference with Cashner is the upside and the cost controlled years. Add in Hendry’s own comments on Marmol, and I’m just not sure that’s the road that gets something going.
I know that the Indians are motivated sellers of Kerry Wood.
He might pitch better back in a Cubs uniform. You never know.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
KW will be on my top 5 list of fav Cubs for a while, but I'd hate to
see Woody pitch worse.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
I'd part with Cashner for Granderson at this point
I think you have to go out and do whatever it takes to get this guy. He fits the teams needs perfectly and he isn’t terribly expensive. Now if they have to take on an extra contract or two to get him, the that is something I would think Hendry needs to talk Ricketts into.
Cashner, Guzman, Marmol, Vitters, Marshall. That might not be enough, though if we take back Guillen and/or Willis/Bonderman maybe it works.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
I don't think it needs to get that crazy
If that couldn’t land Granderson, it would be of fit issues probably. I can’t imagine people topping that level of an offer for Granderson. Sure, the Tigers will have to make a decision on what is enough, but coming off a relaitvely down year with his average defense and awful splits, I can’t imagine his value is going to cost that much. If it does, I back out. While those arms can be replaceable, and while Granderson is as decent a fit as there is out there for the Cubs this offseason, that’s just a bit too much for my tastes. On a side note, Rogers hints that he is willing to offer Marmol/Castro for him. I would not make Castro available in this deal at all. No way, no how. I think they’ll ask for Castro, but no way I fork him over.
I’m not completely sold we are the greatest fit for the Tigers. We lack a ready young CF to give them(Fuld being up there for a prospect age-wise). While we have shortstop talent, are we willing to fork that over? We also don’t have the ready, top bullpen assets. That said, there’s enough talent for us to be in the deal.
Anyhow, what I think it might take to get us into the picture might be 2 of our top 7 prospects. Something like Cashner/Lee. With Lee far away, we’d probably have to part with some closer assets to put a deal together. Maybe you toss in a Fuld and a Darwin Barney as stopgaps. Even a 4 man package of Cashner/Lee/Fuld/Barney would likely leave us on the outside looking in, and therein lies a tough hypothetical decision. I’m not sure I’d give up a 3rd top level prospect to nab Granderson. If they are willing to accept guys like Guzman/Marshall to fill it out, then fine, or cheaper guys like Gaub and Parker, then make the move. But a top prospect? I’d be wary.
If the Cubs are willing to move Marmol, which I’m not sold on, that might impact things, although as noted above, I’m still not sure how much it would impact. After all, there’s an outside chance that Marmol may make near the amount of money that Granderson is slated for in 2010.
I think the question of "fit"
comes down to whether or not we believe Marmol could be traded for Granderson. Detroit is looking for a SS and top relief talent. They’re also looking for cheaper players – and cheap includes more than just 2010 costs, but the increasing costs Granderson’s contract represents. Granderson only makes 5.5 M this year, but he makes 8.25 next year and 10 M in 2012. Trading the combo of Theriot and Marmol allows them to save money at two positions – especially if they play Raburn at CF.
So we fit if we want to fit.
The question is why wouldn’t we want to make those players available? The Cubs may be too attached to their home-grown players and/or convinced that Granderson isn’t worth the cost of upgrading over Marlon Byrd or Mike Cameron. Marmol, in particular, has to be an enticing talent because hitters can’t hit off him. If only you could get his control fixed…
So, let’s look at two player packages with projected production (from Bill James) and salary (from me, take it fwiw):
Granderson CF 5.5 M .275/.353/.491
Orlando Cabrera SS 4M .274/.323/.377
Brandon Lyon CL 4.5M 3.73 ERA
Byrd CF 5M .279/.340/.438
Theriot SS 2.5 M .284/.352/.357
Marmol CL 4M 3.45 ERA
For 2 M, we have quite an overall upgrade – and that’s a conservative FA strategy. What if Kerry Wood was the return for a Bradley three-way trade and we signed Marco Scutaro instead of Cabrera? What if we managed a trade for Stephen Drew, who could move to 2B when Castro is ready?
For me, the short and the long is that we fit perfectly so long as we’re willing to give up Marmol and Theriot and we should be willing to give them up.
Is he traded yet?
See, in a normal economy, that's a great deal.
With Granderson only owed $5.5M for next season, I don’t believe they want to part with Granderson to get rid of Granderson.
I believe he’s the bait to get someone to take some of the contracts off the books where the production doesn’t match up with the dollars. Names already mentioned.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
I should also add, they want to unload contracts and
the Cubs want to be rid of MB. A 1 for 1 Guillen for Bradley/Prospects doesn’t work because the Tigers don’t save much money. Guillen/Granderson for Bradley/Prospects doesn’t work because it appears the Tiggers want someone to take something measurable.
I can’t set a deal they’ll take, but I believe they’ll have to clear roughly $10M plus Granderson to pull the trigger. A Granderson/Bonderman deal for Marshall, Fox & Vitters would probably work for the Tigers, but MB is still here and the payroll is up close to $15M.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
Agree with you
Granderson is only going as part of a larger deal to help clear salary. I don’t see Granderson being moved by himself.
And before anyone says that the Tigers will be desperate, don’t forget there is a certain well-financed East Coast team that will potentially have numerous OF spots. I’m sure they would be willing to take another bad deal as part of a deal if they could get Granderson. For example, Guillen would fit nicely as their DH.
If you give them Theriot, Marmol, and Fox, however
they save money at all of the positions those players fill for them. I think they want to trade Granderson to fill holes they don’t see themselves filling on the free agent market – particularly SS.
Is he traded yet?
I disagree
Reducing salary is priority number 1. If they unload Granderson without including one of their other deals then where does that leave them? No one is taking Ordonez, Guillen, Bonderman or Willis without incentive. Granderson is the incentive.
Which is why I think Ricketts needs to open up the purse
If we take one or two of those guys we can probably save a prospect.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
I'm not in major disagreement here
I’m suggesting that they save money if they get cost-controlled players to fill their other holes. The question is how much money they hope to save.
A lot of their bad contracts are over in 2010, so Ricketts could be willing, in theory, to take a 1 year hit if this was necessary and believed to give a long-term benefit (which Granderson most certainly is). But with these bad deals being 1 year deals, I wonder if they aren’t more looking long-term money issues.
Is he traded yet?
An example
I think the Tigers would be much more interested in something like Granderson and Guillen for Melky Cabrera, Juan Miranda and a pitching prospect over a Theriot/Fox/prospect for Granderson deal.
Dombrowski should be immediately fired if he doesn’t use Granderson to help reduce salary. Granderson is only due $5.5 million in 2010.
If the Cubs want Granderson, they will have to take on additional contracts.
I don't think either of those deals get it done.
And I’m saying salary relief comes in different ways. It’s not just taking bad one-year contracts. It’s also giving long-term cheaper options.
Is he traded yet?
Sorry but that does not compute
Granderson is owed a total of $24 million over 3 years. Guillen is owed $26 million over 2 years. If the Yankees would be willing to take Guillen as their DH, the Tigers will take that over the opportunity to acquire Theriot and Fox. If the Yankees throw in a CF’er to fill in for Granderson, how would that not be a better deal for Detroit? Granderson/Guillen for Cabrera or Gardner and prospects is a much better deal for Detroit.
By the way, Matsui made $13 million last year so adding Guillen is a push for the Yankees.
If you want to talk deals,
I have deals I’ve suggested and none of them are the deals you’re suggesting. I do not think any of the deals you are talking about are close to getting Granderson, particularly because I don’t think they’re trying to get rid of Guillen. They named Guillen their starting LF.
If trading Granderson is only about one-year salary relief, then the Yankees are in a better place to absorb Ordonez, Willis, and/or Bonderman than we are.
But the Yankees are not in a better position to offer young, cheap players at the positions the Tigers need. The Tigers need left-side of the IF players – Theriot, Vitters, Lee, Fox – are all players we can offer, all cheap. The Tigers are also looking for ’pen arms and the Yankees do have young arms, but they have resisted giving up the ones they think can start – Chamberlain, Hughes – and have starting spots open going into 2010.
I don’t think Gardner has any more trade value than Sam Fuld and Melky Cabrera’s value is debatable – it’s certainly not higher than Theriot’s since there are CFs on the free agent market and Raburn may be the CF the Tigers are thinking of replacing Granderson with.
Is he traded yet?
It comes down to what you think is the Tigers priority
They want to unload salary in 2010. Worrying about 2011 and 2012 isn’t their priority from what I’ve seen. You take some of their excess garbage (just look at their deals for 2010) and you could get Granderson.
They also need money now for Verlander
I just think the need to free up money is their top priority over getting a handful of cheap players. They could just resign Orlando Cabrera cheap for SS again. He isn’t staying in Minnesota.
honestly
I’m more inclined to think they’d take a gamble on Darwin Barney than Ryan Theriot (not that I think they would take Barney). Beyond Theriot’s arbitration issues is the fact that, if they move Inge, that’s an infield that has little experience together (sizemore taking over at 2nd) and potentially, significantly less range.
True, Granderson is a little of both.
His deal steadily climbs and while his deal is simple for 2010, the steady money climb and possible questions of him needing a platoon mate down the road make the rest of the contract scarier.
Regardless, CG is still perceived as high value right now and freeing up salary so the team can sign Verlander long term now is priority 1.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
Rumors and spec
don’t suggest that they need to slash heavily. They’ll still have a high end payroll. I really think this is a situation where, if someone takes a contract, great. But they need cost-controlled years of young talent.
I don't know if they
will make dumping contracts a requisite for getting Granderson. A lot of money can come off after 2010 (Magglio’s 15 mil … pretty sure they won’t let that vest, Bonderman’s 12.5 million, Willis’ 12 million, Robertson’s 10 mil, Inge’s 6.6). If someone is willing to take a contract off, sure, they’d be happy, but I think their focus might be on getting as much young, cost-controlled talent as possible to fill in some spots in a somewhat weak system.
Again
The main question I have is … does Marmol and Theriot have enough value for them to make the move?
First, the combination of the two of them will likely cost more than Granderson’s 2010 contract, and they seem to want to slash costs.
Leaving aside the issue of whether or not we should trade Marmol, let’s focus on what value Marmol would have for them. They are looking more for setup options to pair with Zumaya and Perry. Sure, they’d take a closer if they could find one, but when you factor in Marmol’s rising costs and that they do have good young potential pen arms, and I question how much value they would place on Marmol.
Then, there’s Theriot. Dombrowski has never struck me as a heavy on advanced metrics type of guy. Add in that Miguel Cabrera’s at first for them, along with the potential of Inge getting moved, and the infield’s range is questionable.
Short of it is, do Marmol and Theriot specifically make sense for them beyond the positional aspect? While I’m sure it’d be intriguing, I’m also not sure there’s enough value there to convince them to make a swap.
I agree we can't give up Castro in this deal
I think the best thing we can offer is to take big salary off their hands. So perhaps if we take Guillen’s huge deal they can take on Marmol’s newly inflated salary. The problem with that is the Cubs have to be willing to expand payroll to eat those deals, and I don’t think Ricketts is willing to do so.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Yeah, I think I would be, too.
Not Castro, though.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Oh for sure
they might actually need a 3B in a few years too. I think you protect Castro and one of Cashner/Jackson the rest can be had.
Also I just read Phil Rogers proposal, besides the typical factual errors and hyperbolic comparison to Derek Jeter there is actually a rare good point in there. He’s kind of nuts to give up Castro though.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Now that I see Inge has one year left on his deal
Vitters might be really attractive to them. Of course I don’t see him being ready opening day 2011, but maybe they could be convinced of that.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Wow
Why don’t we give them everyone? That’s an awful lot for a guy with a .249 BA. Let’s give them Fox and Starlin Castro while we are at it! Give me a break.
If we are going to do a deal, we should do it like the Phillies do. Remember when they got Cliff Lee? They got last year’s Cy Young Award winner without giving up their top prospects. They said that Drabek and company were off limits, and they ended up giving up a guy they had given up on (Carrasco) and a few others that don’t impact their future.
The Cubs should do the same thing. The following Cubs should be untouchable: Marmol, Aramis Ramirez, Lilly, Castro, and that’s it. If you have to give up someone like Cashner, that’s fine. Vitters is too much for a guy with a .249 BA and a mediocre OBP.
Also, remember that we are taking on considerable salary if we get him. That has to weigh in as well.
So everyone calm down. Don’t jump to overpaying (like Hendry does).
You do realize that Granderson had a pretty unlucky season?
If his BABIP had been .303 instead of .276 his line would have been .273/.353/.472 and that would be pretty damn good. Plus that NL pitching probably helps him too.
Vitters is a guy who. while still young, got killed in High-A baseball this year. He is incapable of laying off pitches and the higher up he goes in the minors the more breaking balls for strikes, the worse he looks. He could still become a really good player, but I’m not losing a bit of sleep over dealing him for an established centerfielder with a friendly contract and the near certainty of a 4 WAR season.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Why on earth would Ramirez, Marmol and Lilly be considered "untouchable"?
Ted Lilly “may” return by the end of April in the last year of his deal. He also wouldn’t attract much of anything due to coming off surgery. Aramis can opt out again after 2010 and become a free agent again, who knows what kind of money the CUBS are going to have to throw at him to retain him again and Marmol is going to be asking for a hefty spike in the near future.
The only untouchable should be Castro. As many others have been saying, now may be the time to unload Josh Vitters. His value is still high and he has proven still that he can’t maintain plate discipline.
The CUBS’ system is getting better and I don’t think that it will cost the CUBS a boat load to get Granderson. Look at the hauls that brought in Cliff Lee, Johan Santana, etc. as of late.
PHISH IS BACK!!!
HAMPTON, VA - MARCH 6, 7 and 8th!!!!
by TheBeerBaron on Nov 12, 2009 10:19 AM CST up reply actions
Now is definitely the time to unload Theriot.
We should learn from the Brewers who waited too long to trade a better SS. Theriot’s value could easily crater before Castro is ready and there are several decent stopgap options on the FA market at a time when GMs aren’t going to throw excessive money at them. It is the perfect time to trade Theriot.
Is he traded yet?
Yeah I would be trying to include Theriot in any deal I make
If I’m hendry. Then again if im hendry I’m in love with theriot so i think he’s the franchise player.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
I like the idea of selling high on Theriot, but it's not like
the team/minors are rife with SS options.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
?
We’ve got two excellent SS options coming up, one that many think will be ready in 2011.
Is he traded yet?
Okay, but aren't we thinking the Cubs are trying to compete
in 2010?
Trading Theriot to help fille the need in CF creates a need at SS. I don’t see any gain for 2010.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
Theriot doesn't offer that much, though.
We take a minor hit on value with the worst FA option and could even upgrade if we chose right. Scutaro, for example, projects better, I believe for 2010 than Theriot. I’m not convinced Scutaro is worth it, being a Type A and all. But Theriot is more valuable to a team that doesn’t have a star SS in the pipeline.
Is he traded yet?
See you're kind of contradicting yourself here
Saying a shortstop like Theriot is valuable enough to fetch value in trade, but then saying that another shortstop like Theriot (Scutaro) should be cheap and easy to acquire.
Except that I answered the contradiction.
1. Theriot has more value to teams needing to cut costs – and don’t want to play in the FA market for that reason.
2. Theriot has more value to teams needing a longer term answer at SS, because there’s no long-term answer in the FA market.
The Cubs won’t use Theriot at SS in 2011 while other teams could; the Cubs, possibly, can afford to pay twice Theriot’s salary for a SS, especially if Granderson allows them to save money on a CF in 2010.
Plus, I’m not saying the burden of value in this trade is on Theriot. I have said several times that he’s not close to that. But if the Tigers are fielding offers from the Yankees, looking at Austin Jackson, and from the Cubs, looking at Josh Vitters, Theriot’s addition is the kind of addition that could help tip the balance, especially because the Yankees can’t counter in that area.
Is he traded yet?
Well I guess we'll just have to disagree on this.
I don’t see a team trying to control costs being interested in a guy who is already arbitration-eligible.
I'm fine with disagreeing
I just think there’s a difference between the Padres trying to control costs and the Tigers. And I also think it’s more than just one guy – it’s that we can give them multiple guys at positions that would help them.
Is he traded yet?
But a move like this
…would be a move where the Tigers are looking to improve themselves beyond the 3-4 years they control Granderson.
In addition to not being cost-controlled, Theriot is under team control for fewer years than Granderson; in other words, he doesn’t provide benefit over a longer term than Granderson does.
So the Tigers would be making themselves worse in the short term with no chance of long-term benefit.
I'm happy to let this go if you want,
but I’m also frustrated that I can’t seem to get across the idea that Theriot is not the major piece in any deal for Granderson. He’s not insignificant, but he’s not going to carry the burden of our trade value.
If Jim Hendry came to Dave Dombrowski and said, "Hey, I’d like to talk about a package centered around Ryan Theriot for Curtis Granderson, it wouldn’t go anywhere. But it’s a different thing to offer Marmol and Theriot and Fox.
Is he traded yet?
That's fair.
His name just jumped out because I keep seeing it all over the thread. We both agree that any trade would have to be centered around high-value, no-service-time prospects like Vitters, Castro, Jackson, or Cashner.
You don't think the rest of the teams know Theriot like we know Theriot?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
JC Bradbury is doing a great story right now on the myths of the hot stove
…and this is one of them:
I think teams know Theriot better than some of our fans, for sure.
But with Theriot’s UZR looking good enough and with a cheap pricetag, he has value to everyone needing a cheap SS and Detroit needs a cheap SS. I also think Theriot will have more value to the minority of teams who overvalue “winning-type players.” The problem is that we are one of those teams and so a matchup might be difficult. In the case of Granderson, however, he’s also a winning-type player, so things might even out here.
Is he traded yet?
holy crap, you've completely gutted the bullpen.
Bullpen pieces can be had, I know, but if they’re bringing salary back, that means that funds will be limited for FAs, and you’ve just traded most of the valuable chips, so that doesn’t leave much for trades.
"Enough foreplay- let's get crackin'"- Fred Garvin
Besides Marmol I think those guys are replaceable
Maybe you have to keep one of Guzman or Marmol, I’m just throwing a proposal out there. I think if we did deal those guys you probably have to go sign Billy Wagner or something like that
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
So, Bruce Miles' recent article
quotes Hendry saying they won’t be making “major” moves. I think a Marmol-Theriot-Granderson trade would count as major. Anyone with an account over there want to ask Bruce how realistic it is to hope for Granderson?
Is he traded yet?
Wouldn't a player like this coming on the market
Change your thinking though? At least for me I think that report changed the way I look at the entire offseason.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
It certainly does change the way I look at this off-season.
But Jim Hendry knew about this when he made those comments, which has me concerned.
Is he traded yet?
I found that comment by Jim concerning.
He’s actively trying to move MB without having to eat the contract. Why would he dismiss a major move.
Was Jim referencing a major move in Free Agency, not trades, or any type of major move?
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
That really bothers me
When a player like Granderson comes on the market, you have to make some sacrifices to get him. If that means taking a one season payroll swell I don’t think there should be a question of doing it.
Hypothetically if Hendry had a deal on the table the involved taking back additional salary and Ricketts said no based on $$$, the would be extremely disturbing to me. The freaking Marlins can extend themselves for one season every once in a while, why the hell can’t the Cubs?
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Extend?
This is the issue raised during last season. How high is too high? The Cubs have one of the highest salaries. Hendry has spent it. You mention a one season payroll swell. How do you see that? Adding Granderson will impact the team for 2010 and 2011 until Bradley and Fukusome come off.
Outside of the Yankees, all teams say no at some point. Do you think the Red Sox wanted to extend last season for Texeira knowing that the Yankees would get him?
The Red Sox did make a huge offer to Tex
just not big enough. The one year swell comes from taking on guys like WIllis and Guillen and Bonderman. You suck it up for one season, then in 2010 you have a ton of money come off the books, and can go back to the $140 payroll area.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Hmm
Well I suppose you make him the starting 1B in 2011 to get something out of him.
On a side note I’m looking through the Tigers Cot’s Contracts page, there are a ton of huge deals that don’t make sense to me. Nate robertson, jeremy bonderman, and Dontrelle willis all got significant deals that don’t seem to make sense to me.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Agree 100% with you
The Tigers are a mess contract-wise. That is why thinking you could pick off their one trading chip which isn’t overly expensive and not have to take some of their other stuff is dreaming.
I agree with you on that
Granderson comes with one of those bad pitchers and probably another guy.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Between those two I bet they can dump all the contracts they want
If they really want to go all out salary dump
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
That's what's great about Granderson -
his salary this season isn’t that much more than what we’ll need to pay for Byrd, possibly even less. If we don’t have to take an albatross contract to get him, we can make this work.
Is he traded yet?
I really think
That the only way The Cubs are intent on trading Marmol is if they intend on getting a closer like say Billy Wagner. Otherwise, your pretty much filling one hole by creating another.
Alright, I've gone back to the original article suggesting Granderson is available.
It’s Joel Sherman at the NYP.
Here are some relevant quotes.
In a cost-cutting frame of mind, the Tigers have let teams now that Curtis Granderson could be had for the right package, an NL executive told The Post.
He is not a player that Detroit truly wants to trade and neither is the available Edwin Jackson, another player who will draw interest not just from the Yankees, but the Mets, too.
But the Tigers are supporting a top payroll in one of the cities hit hardest by the economic downturn, and they have many long-term commitments to players who are just about untradeable, including Magglio Ordonez, Carlos Guillen, Jeremy Bonderman, Dontrelle Willis and Nate Robertson.
These quotes suggest to me that Detroit’s not asking people to take one of the bad contract, but are looking to fill their other needs w/o resorting to long free agent contracts. Put yourself in Detroit’s shoes – is it better to take a trade package of Melky Cabrera , Juan Miranda, and a pitching prospect for Curtis Granderson and Magglio Ordonez or to trade just Granderson for Vitters, Theriot, Fox, and Stevens?
Is he traded yet?
Joel Sherman has another piece on Granderson today
and he’s still backing the idea that a deal wouldn’t need to take back a bad contract. He thinks the Yankees could gain an advantage by taking a contract, but that’s not how he starts approaching this deal.
Is he traded yet?
Jim
Please don’t let the Yankees come in and beat you to this deal, beg Ricketts for extra payroll next year. Get it done Jimbo, I am tired of not hearing any good news for the Cubs. Please give me something positive to talk about at the water cooler.
by Cubsfan Waveland on Nov 12, 2009 12:57 PM CST reply actions
Thing is
the Yankees might conceivably fit them better. Now, it isn’t a great fit either, but if the Yankees have a lot of young pen arms and have a decent (but perhaps a bit overhyped) young CF in Austin Jackson. They don’t really have a shortstop to offer of much value, though.
LONG SHOT
This Grandrson stuff sounds way too complicated, Reed Johnson is a lot better than people think, he reminds me of Dykstra, scrappy, goes all out, he should lead off…..Fuld? Super overrated, has the potential of Doug Dascenzo, defensive replacement pinch runner at best
RJ is not an everyday player.
I love the guy, but he can’t hit RHP consistently….and in the lead off spot, that would be bad.
"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day." ~ Frank Sinatra
Johnson has a major medical problem
Bruce Miles reported last week that the Cubs are concered about his degenerative back condition. My guess is the Cubs will not re-sign for cheap one year deal with incentives. You have definately underrated Fuld. He is an excellent player to get about 40 starts subbing in LF & CF and indeed coming in as defensive replacement and pinch runner on other days.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 12, 2009 4:04 PM CST up reply actions
will NOT re-sign, or WILL re-sign?
"I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day." ~ Frank Sinatra
Will NOT re-sign
unless it is a very cheap deal and even then it is hard not go with Fuld if you have to cut one guy. Ok he has no power but
he is faster, a lot cheaper and he can draw a lot of walks.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 12, 2009 5:50 PM CST up reply actions
Actully I love RJ even if I love Fuld more.
I am not biased in this case but I just think the economics and Johnson’s back issue are likely to mean Fuld gets the chair when the music stops. I mean Fuld might be a small piece of a trade but they won’t be stashing him in Iowa anymore.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 12, 2009 7:48 PM CST up reply actions
Wait, so does RJ have a degenerative back condition...
…or is he just recovering from an injury? I thought it was the latter.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Apparently both
His injury this year was his foot but according to Bruce Miles the Cubs are concerned about a degenerative back condition he has had for a while.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Nov 14, 2009 9:07 AM CST up reply actions
Oh, well, I know about the foot injury.
I just thought the back surgery he had while with the Blue Jays was because of an injury, not a condition. Do you happen to have a link for that Miles article?
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
why is Reed Johnson better than people think?
If anything, I think Cubs fans overrate Reed, because he’s a nice guy who hustles.
"when" is Johnson better than people think?
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Nov 12, 2009 5:27 PM CST up reply actions
ZOMG - all these years later, we solved it!
Reed Johnson is playing first base!
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Exactly
He is a journeyman, at best a 4th OF. Go with Fuld.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Nov 13, 2009 10:16 AM CST up reply actions
I've had enough "scappy" in CF
I want “good.”
Besides, Johnson is a serious health risk with his back. With Soriano and Ramirez having significant injuries in 2009, the Cubs already have a full quotient of health risks in their starting 8.
ADAM LIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Granderson? Eh.
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
SPEAKING OF ADAM LIND...
…HAS EVERYONE HEARD??!! ADAM LIND WON A SILVER SLUGGER AWARD. WHY DOESN’T HENDRY TRADE MILTON BRADLEY FOR LIND?! MAYBE WE COULD THROW IN AARON MILES? LOL G2G BYE!!!
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
GET IT DONE JIM!!!
::random spasms of happiness::
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
Random spasms of happiness...
… would be an excellent name for a electro-math-noise-rockvante garde band.
Just sayin’.
Dum spiro spero…
Follow me on twitter or else: @andrewjstone.
by AndrewJStone on Nov 16, 2009 12:27 PM CST up reply actions
.202 / .262 / .309
Those are CGrand’s numbers from 07-09 against lefties. In his best overall season ever, 2007, his OPS against lefties was .494.
I was surprised when I read Neyer’s article that suggested CGrand is a platoon player. I thought, “Granderson? You’ve gotta be kidding. The guy is a stud.” But the numbers are quite sobering.
IF the cubs trade for him, let’s hope they use him in a platoon. But I’m hoping they don’t seriously deplete the farm for a platoon player when, let’s face it, the Cubs are not a team that is a player or two from the World Series.
Well then...
… acquiring Granderson would be a reason to keep Reed Johnson, who has a lifetime .841 OPS vs. LHP (.313/.378/.463).
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Since Fuld seems able to hit LHP
he might be another option who would give us room to keep trying Granderson against some LHP and see how he does in the NL.
Is he traded yet?
I'd also like to see Fuld get a legitimate shot
and I’d be happy if he was only slightly below average against lefties (as opposed to quite bad) while playing good D.
Well lets say hypothetically the Cubs get Granderson
and the Pat Burrell trade is the Milton outcome. Could you get away with Dome in CF and Burrell in RF for games against lefties? Or would the defense of Granderson make up for his weak bat?
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
Hm...good question.
I think I’d suffer through Granderson vs. a LHP if Burrell was in right field.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
That is probably the way to go in this hypothetical world
Dome isn’t good against lefties either, using him as a late inning replacement is probably the way to go. I also think that getting Granderson would make the Burrell deal better simply for this alone.
Just say no to players named Aaron on the Cubs.
If you didn't want to sacrifice D
is Granderson a better option vs. lefties than whoever the other outfielder is (Fuld or RJ)? I’d take RJ over Burrell/Granderson. Fuld, maybe—I don’t know, and I’m having trouble finding Fuld’s minor league splits. Maybe toonster knows how Fuld might do platooning vs. lefties?
Thanks for the link,
very nice site. Fuld looks like he could do a decent job…reverse splits in 08 and 09.
Davidoff reported today
(h/t mlbtr, link to article here)
that the angels are in it. If that’s the case, that’s a shrewd move on their part to add another lefty bat and move him to lf, where he could be a plus defender. That said, the Angels would be a dangerous competitor for his services because they seem, on paper, to fit that much better with Detroit. A bunch of young arms could be mixed into the deal, starting and pen, and they have enough middle infielders to offer up, along with a solid CF prospect in Bourjos. The Angels don’t have a great system, but the fit here is really good for Detroit. Something to watch.
That's tough. The Angels have
the MI and financial ability to hit on all levels – taking a contract, cost controlled talent, etc.
if this was still new to me, i wouldn't understand
They are tough
but they have also been reluctant to trade their prospects. We’ll see.
Is he traded yet?
Take it for what it's worth...
…but here’s an afternoon tweet from the illustrious Phil Rogers:
Baseball America thinks #Cubs can do Granderson trade w/Hak-Ju Lee, not Starlin Castro, as SS dealt.
Naturally, he provides no link or further information.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
I think it can be done as well
I think a package of Cashner/Lee will definitely have us in the game. The question becomes if they want a third top prospect. If they do, I’d have a tough time making the deal. If not, then I’m open to making a trade. I love following the farm, but you have to make tough decisions sometimes, and Lee is so far away while Cashner is likely a pen arm. If they are amenable to adding end of the rotation starters (Marshall/Gorzelanny) and/or secondary prospects that they want (guys like Blake Parker, Sam Fuld, Darwin Barney, John Gaub and others), then I would probably make a deal, provided it’s not say a ridiculous number.
I think that if Castro is a top 25-35 prospect
that’s in the range of players you don’t see traded anymore until they’ve disappointed at the ML level.
Is he traded yet?
Here's your link
There are some quotes in there sure to frustrate some of the posters here whose favorite activity is belittling the Cubs farm system.
Is he traded yet?
Good stuff - thanks for tracking it down!
Wow, when Phil Rogers actually does his job, he’s really quite useful.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
remember when we had a young version of curtis granderson
and traded him for aaron heilman….
that was fun
now 1 year later we can empty the farm for a similar version just a few years older and more expensive. awesome, great foresight
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 13, 2009 4:33 PM CST reply actions
i'm sorry
i’m bitter… we finally have some depth to be excited about in the farm system and we may be trading it away to try to fix a hole that could’ve been plugged internally with a little more patience
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 13, 2009 4:41 PM CST up reply actions
You're right to be frustrated by the mistake in the past.
But Granderson is worth being excited to acquire now.
Is he traded yet?
depends on price
if we give up multiple high-end prospects instead of selling high on someone like Marmol, i don’t think its a great move
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 13, 2009 9:19 PM CST up reply actions
Jim Hendry tends to sell high on his pre-ML prospects, though.
Is Dontrelle Willis the only one people regretted trading?
Is he traded yet?
Are we really regretting Nolasco?
Maybe you could argue that had Joe Girardi not been his first manager he’d be more productive..
Is he traded yet?
I don't necessarily regret Nolasco...
…. but he surely had more trade value at the time than “Juan Pierre”.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
seriously?
Nolasco had an FIP of 3.76 in 2008 and 3.29 in 2009
he’s one of the top 20 pitchers in the NL… he’s cheap and under team control for a few more years
ummm… yeah i regret that
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 16, 2009 9:37 AM CST up reply actions
top 20 in the NL?
I could see rating him at the outside of the top 20 last year, but after his 2009 actual ERA…
Is he traded yet?
he was BETTER last year
based on peripherals than ’08
its not his fault he had a horrible defense behind him
by DartmouthCubsFan on Nov 16, 2009 11:27 PM CST up reply actions
you dont
include your ss and closer in any deal. dont appreciate theriot??? put blancos there all season and watch what he hits. and marmol is our only option as a closer. i would like granderson but would be more inclined to offer guys like marshall,fontenot and the like in a package deal. not our better players.
Sure
If Marshall/Fontenot types to land Granderson could get it done, I’d prefer to do that as well. But let’s face it, he’s a cheap young CF in his prime. If he gets moved, it’s either going to take some big league talent or some of our top chips, like a Cashner or a Hak-ju Lee.
Btw, with Fontenot getting Super Two status, I highly doubt any team would agree to trade for him as a part of a deal.
I think daver or someone cited this article, but I don't remember a link, so
link.
Basically Dave Cameron argues that it doesn’t make much sense to trade Curtis Granderson, which means, of course, that it makes a ton of sense to trade for him.
Is he traded yet?
How is this recommended? Please, tell me.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
I think it's Rec'd more for the discussion than the actual Fanpost.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
The question is, who do you give up for him?
And I’m also curios, why do the Tigers really want to trade him? Is it to cut pay roll, or is it because he isn’t that good of a player? Is he an upgrade over Bradley? Please tell me because I don’t really know. I don’t remember him doing much against the Cubs so I’m not so sure.
by braziliancubsfan on Nov 14, 2009 11:15 PM CST reply actions
the only explanation that people can come up with
that sounds valid to me is that the Tigers have been ordered to slash costs. But that still doesn’t hold much water, because the cost to find a replacement CF will eat into the 5.5 million that Granderson is making.
This could simply be an attempt to find out if they can land a mega-package for Granderson, and if not, to pass. Or maybe Dombrowski has multiple moves planned.
I agree...
…if their goal is to cut salary, there are plenty of other choices on their roster that would be better choices to move.
I don’t know anything about the Tigers farm system, but their number one goal may be to just get younger.
Dumbrowski is in the same boat this year as Hendry, he has been given a lot of dough and ownership isn’t all too happy about the results.
"I don't like them fellas that drive in two runs but let in three" Casey Stengel
The system's in a weak phase
It’s not horrible, but it’s not great. There’s some good young arms (Casey Crosby, rookie Jacob Turner stand out) and some positional assets, but not much in terms of quality depth. Their pen oriented draft of a couple years back, imo, as a bad idea.
I mean, look, I think if DD ponders it, I think it’s sort of a “white flag” trade in that, it would be because he doesn’t feel extremely comfortable about his team’s title chances in 2010 (fair enough) and figures that, if he can land a bushel of prospects, that combined with the money clearing after 2010 could accelerate the rebuilding process.
That said, the AL Central is weak. Now would seem the time to try and make one final run with this core, hope that they stay healthy and get a bit lucky, hope that Zumaya/Perry play up to their potential in the pen, and hope that Verlander can carry them in the playoffs. But I’ll say this … if DD really does feel that poorly about his team’s chances in 2010 and opts for moves, I’d at least appreciate a GM that made a tough decision he thought was necessary (provided that it wasn’t an end of the world horrible trade) than one that avoided tough decisions (as many GM’s are wont to do.)
Granderson is the bait
Ordonez and the other contracts are the switch. The Tigers can’t get rid of these guys without essentially paying their contracts in 2010 anyway. But if they add in Granderson, he is the sweetner on the deal.
does anyone
really want to trade 4 or 5 players for this guy?? thats probably what the tigers would want.
LOL Jake Fox = Milton Bradley
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Nov 16, 2009 12:01 AM CST up reply actions
Yeah, I looked at these this morning.
This CHONE fellow really likes Jake Fox.
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
scales will somehow have almost as many home runs as baker fontenot and fukudome
what has the world come to
"hey
by jesus christos on Nov 16, 2009 4:03 PM CST up reply actions
It always amuses me that projection systems project a number of plate appearances.
I don’t think they intend to predict that, for example, Starlin Castro will get 363 MLB PAs in 2010. But I’m really not sure what they’re meaning to do. Maybe it’s just a way to make the rate stats more concrete.
The White Sox want him too....
but I can’t imagine the Tigers trading him to a division rival. That just isn’t done these days. The days of the Cubs trading guys like Brock and Sutter to the Cardinals, or whatever the equivalent of that is for other teams, is long gone.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bleed Cubbie Blue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
- Shane Victorino lands role on ‘Hawaii Five-0′
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
