MLive - Granderson to Cubs unlikely
I don't think I've seen this specific article linked yet, although I could be mistaken. Anyhow, James Schmehl has another article out, suggesting that the Cubs need to budge on Marmol or Castro to make a deal happen. Sounds somewhat similar to his last article, but figured I'd post it.
about 2 years ago
toonsterwu
56 comments
0 recs |
Comments
I really want Granderson.
If the Cubs don’t get Granderson, I expect them to go after Byrd, if he is still on the market by then. I think Byrd may actually do decent with the Cubs. I know most of you may not agree with me.
I may be in the minority, but I'd give up Marmol
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
I would too
I want Granderson bad bad bad!! I love Curtis Granderson!
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
It's disappointing
if it’s true that Marmol could bring Granderson and the Cubs aren’t doing it. Marmol’s best days are probably behind him and he could lose all trade value by the end of 2010. Plus there are closers all over the trade market. How do you not trade Marmol?
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 4, 2009 9:25 PM CST up reply actions
and you feel comfortable with Guzman closing ?
If not him , who else ?
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Dec 5, 2009 2:56 AM CST up reply actions
I'd look for a bargain on Brandon Lyon
or I’d love to be able to do something like swap Burrell for Wood.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 5, 2009 7:29 AM CST up reply actions
Love this idea
And haven’t seen it really put out there.
The biggest trouble of course is that these “domino” trades rarely come to fruition.
I agree with DGU
Trade Marmol if that is stopping the trade of Granderson .. Marmol is not all that .. IMO would rather have an everyday centerfielder for years to come .. Thats what the Cubs have been looking for . Plus a lefthander that Lou likes for his lineup .. Now I have been hearing the Cubs are looking at Mike Cameron .. Too old , strikes out WAAAAAYYY TOO MUCH . And is only a rent a player for a year or two . Granderson young , hometown kid , and I really admire him for his off season work . Would like to keep Castro though .
Isnt he pretty much a glorified platoon player?
sure he’s fun too watch, but hasnt he become a bit overblown?
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.
Yes
youre right a .210 avg and .270 OBP against lefties are awesome
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.
How many lefty pitchers are there?
Meanwhile, he can still run the bases whatever pitcher is on the mound. He can still play good CF defense no matter what pitcher is on the mound. He still has a good clubhouse and community presence…
I don’t get why there can be a player who fits our team needs in nearly every way, and some people just want to focus on one or two small negatives.
Is he traded yet?
thats a pretty glaring negative
if its gonna cost our top prospects
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.
Given that we could use LH balancing
and most LH hitters suffer against LH hitters, I hardly see it as a glaring negative. I’d rather have a LH hitter who everyone knows should be platooned than a guy whose splits aren’t as obvious and it keeps him on the field v. LHP.
Again, how many LH pitchers are there?
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 5, 2009 1:06 PM CST up reply actions
Enough.
The man was down right abysmal against lefties. Honestly it’s almost a guaranteed out, along with Fukudome against lefties. What will our outfield look like against a lefty in the playoffs? In the NL we may be narrowed down to 6 hitters in theory. How would we win like that? In my opinion, Granderson would just be a defensive upgrade that will cost us something more valuable than money. Mike Cameron would be a much better option, short term, great defensively, and very comparable offensive stats to Granderson.
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
Re-sign Reed Johnson and play him against LHP.
Why are so many people against platoons? Mike Cameron is of little use against RHP, which are 80% of pitchers. Curtis Granderson is of no offensive use against the vast minority of pitchers – and that’s somehow a final verdict against him?
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 5, 2009 5:38 PM CST up reply actions
Right, but with trader Jim at the helm
the cost might be too high; if we can get buy with Cameron and keep Marmol, Vitters and/or Castro, why not? Granderson isnt enough of a difference maker for what he will eventually cost, and as we’ve seen, when Hendry gets fixated on a guy, or Lou for that matter, rationality goes by the wayside
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.
Say Cubs trade Marmol
for Granderson, who would fill the void at closer? Gonzalez? Soriano? Brett Myers? Valverde? All those will cost money that the Cubs may or may not have.
I love Granderson, I just don’t see parting with Marmol or Castro to get him.
The question is -
given Marmol’s arb cost and Granderson’s inexpensive 2010 salary – how much more would Soriano+Granderson be over Marmol+Byrd/Cameron? I’m not sure the first is more expensive than the second.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 5, 2009 7:28 AM CST up reply actions
Not sure if the first (Soraino+Granderson) is more expensive than the second (Marmol+Byrd/Cameron)?
Soriano + Granderson = 18M + 5.5M = 23.5M
Marmol + Byrd/Cameron = 3M(est) + 10M(est) = 13M
23.5M is a lot more expensive than 13M. Even if you got a lot more generous on Marmol’s arb and B/C’s contract (boy I hope not), there’s still a big difference. Maybe you mixed up the names?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
ahh... full-thread-reading-comprehension failure by moi....
thanks for the correction.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
It was kind of silly of me to shorten Rafael Soriano to "Soriano"
given that we have Alfonso Soriano on roster.
Is he traded yet?
I got really excited for a few moments a week or so ago...
I was skimming through some Boston paper online and and saw the headline “Red Sox interested in Soriano” and I was like – yeah! Take our $18M enigma off our hands! But I looked a little closer and it was Rafael, not Alfonso… bummer.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
+1, i had the same reaction for a fraction of a sec
Bob Brenly on Leo Nunez "Dan Uggla just saved Nunez’ life because Koyie would break him into a million pieces"
Being that the Cubs...
are more into trading than buying, you have to give up something of value to get what you want to help your team. Trade Marmol to Detroit for Granderson, then flip Bradley and 10 mil to Cleveland for Wood. Problem solved!!!
Except that Cleveland is just one of the many places where Milton
is thought to have worn out his welcome.
"Enough foreplay- let's get crackin'"- Fred Garvin
I wonder if new manager Manny Acta might have some thoughts on that
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Who's platoonable, declining, and injury-prone.
And then there’s the unproven LaPorta in LF and the big question mark of Andy Marte at 1B.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 5, 2009 1:45 PM CST up reply actions
PB
in LF or at 1B?
Not saying it is highly likely at all… but maybe they save a little on the contract switch and get out from under the possibility of the 2011 option kicking in?
Well...
… that’d be interesting, if the Tribe were interested in Burrell, I’d see if I could figure out a way to do that.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
If Mark Shapiro is going to add another OF to the mix, I'm thinking he'd rather have Bradley than Burrell.
Hafner is entrenched at DH – his contract runs through ‘12 – and can’t really play the field anymore so there’s not many ABs available there. Unless he gets hurt, of course, but you don’t swing big deals for injury backups.
If Burrell was a whiz at 1B, I could see that making more sense since Marte, LaPorta and Gimenez are all relatively inexperienced – and all RHers. But I don’t hear any plaudits for Burrell’s glovework so I can’t see him being much of an improvement. Maybe if he was LH but he’s not so…
Choo and Sizemore make up 2/3 of the outfield so really it’s only LF (and 4th & 5th OFers) that’s up for grabs. Assuming Marte has the edge at 1B, you’ve got LaPorta, Crowe, and Brantley – all young and talented with lots of upside, but are they ready yet? IMO no, not if the Indians want to make a run at it in 2010 – AL Central could very well be a crapshoot again. LaPorta is probably the closest.
I certainly don’t see Burrell being good enough to help Indians “go for it” in 2010, but Bradley could be. If I’m Shapiro, I’d have a long talk with new manager Manny Acta and listen carefully to what he had to say.
And obviously, if Indians are rebuilding and shooting for 2011 or later, it would be foolish to have Burrell or Bradley take ABs away from their young talent.
What I don’t have a feel for is how bad Shapiro wants to get out from under Wood’s contract. My best guess is that he’d like to but he doesn’t need to. Depending on how the season goes, I’d say his best bet would be to deal him at the trade deadline – assuming Tribe is not in it and/or Chris Perez (from the DeRosa deal) has stepped it up.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
I like Bradley as a theoretical fit for Cleveland
and I like a Wood-Bradley swap.
The problem is that I thought I remembered Cleveland’s brass saying they were making an example of Bradley shipping him out – that they didn’t want this type of player. Maybe someone has a better memory of the event.
Is he traded yet?
by DGU on Dec 5, 2009 8:42 PM CST up reply actions
I don't remember the specifics other than MB and then-manager Eric Wedge had words...
…make that, pretty strong words. Obviously Shapiro backed his manager then and Bradley was on his way out.
Now Shapiro has a pretty good eye for talent so I’m sure he knows what kind of a player Bradley could be, but he’s also been through the Bradley rollercoaster once so he won’t be blind to the risks.
That’s why I’m thinking he if he’s even thinking about possibly acquiring MB, he’d have a very long talk with Manny Acta. I can’t imagine he’d force MB on his newly-hired manager but if Manny indicated he’s willing to take the risk, I’m sure Shapiro would chew on it some more.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
I agree with you completely.
Wedge is gone, so IF Cleveland is interested in MB, Acta would have to be on board. We don’t know if he is. We do know that it has been reported that “three teams” have inquired recently about MB. We know that two of them are the Rangers and Rays. We don’t know who the third team is.
I think we’ll find out within a week, though.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
too bad
as granderson would be a nice fit. but you cant blow up your team at one posistion to get him even though marmol is not a sure thing at closer we have no one better. and with lee/ramirez possibly leaving soon you dont want to trade guys like castro and vitters.
Second-guessing is rarely a productive exercise, because we seldom know all that is involved
but if Marmol is indeed the hold-up in trading for Granderson, I might be inclined to second-guess that one for awhile. I can understand if Castro is deal-breaker, but Marmol?
Of course, if I’m Detroit, I don’t trade Granderson period. But if they’re willing to do so for a package centered around Marmol and a top prospect or two, I would hope the Cubs strongly consider that.
I know that would leave a perceived hole at closer, but there’s some low-hanging fruit about 350 miles to the east of us by the name of Kerry Wood. Find out if Cleveland would rather have Bradley or Burrell and ante up the dollars needed to make it happen.
Yes, it will probably mean eating more $ than Ricketts or Hendry were planning on. Probably a lot more. But a businessman and a Cub fan like Ricketts ought to recognize the goodwill that can be generated with your fanbase by bringing back Wood. I think those April and May games would sell a lot more tickets with Wood back.
Heck, forget the extra tickets – just being able to turn Bradley into Wood would a PR bonanza! Much better than Burrell or Castillo. And with Guzman as a possible closer-in-waiting, I think Lou can manage Wood’s workload to ensure Wood’s 2011 option doesn’t vest (55 GFs).
I’m a Cleveland fan and I’m not sure if they really need a veteran corner OF bat to take away ABs from their up-and-comers. But they do seem anxious to move Wood’s contract, so who knows.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Dec 5, 2009 10:51 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
A few problems
All this circuitous planning to undo Jimbos mistakes just underscores the fact that he needs to go and Angel Guzman is hardly a closer in waiting, hes a surgery in waiting, hes no wear near durable enough to close.
I dont think losing Marmol would be a nail in the coffin, buts hes the only one in the bullpen with whom we know what to expect, so I think his loss would be relatively large given the makeup of the pen at this point in time.
Frankly id rather give up Castro, theres no way he’s gonna live up to this hype now and given the age of our core guys, we should just go for it now and if Marmol falls somewhere b/t his 08 and 09 and Granderson does the same, we’d be far more competitive than we wood hanging onto a minor league second short stop who is all of a sudden the next Luis Aparicio
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.
again, even if Castro doesn't live up to the hype
a solid glove shortstop with solid contact ability is still a solid asset.
The reason I’d be against a Castro move is quite simple – I’m not sold that trading for Granderson substantially changes our fortunes for 2010, and at some point, this organization has to think about the future. While the system is improved, it isn’t elite yet. If there was a move out there that could substantially change our fortunes, I’d ponder dealing Castro. I’m not sure Granderson is the said move. I’d be more inclined to trade Marmol than I would Castro, as you could always hope for a little luck with the pen, or perhaps call up one of our young arms come midseason. Finding a decent major league shortstop is hard enough – finding one with high potential is even tougher.
We already have that.
Theriot. Oh wait he just has the contact ability.
Randy Wells. A product of the Roy Halladay School of Pitching, located in Toronto, Canada. Possible relocation.
What about the HYPE
On Vitters . Last year Vitters was untouchable . The new up and coming third baseman to taake over Aram’s spot at third base . He is just a prospect .Might and might not turn out to be as good as he is projected .. I would sure like the Cubs to make a few moves while Lee , Aram, Soto ,if Soto regains 2008 stats , Sori has one of his best years , I’ m hoping maybe Rudy can help his swing , Fukudome comes alive , full season ,not just half .. IMO the Cubs are just short of a couple of pieces and I think Granderson would sure help with his speed and glove in centerfield . and like DGU said there are more righthanded pitchers out there than lefty’s ,and sign Reed johnson as a back up and platoon player as the fourth outfielder .. I am all in to pick up Granderson .. Don’t forget he hit 30 homeruns last year
Well the investment in Vitters has been far larger
given his draft spot and contract, so it would behoove the team to give him a shot to develop naturally. I think Ramirez is a good enough player to where he’ll be servicable to us beyond his contracts expiration date, allowing Vitters more time to develop and either succeed of fail
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.
Vitters
I’ve never been as high on Vitters as many other Cubs fans, so I’m not the right person to speak about him. That said, at some point, the organization has to think about the future, whether we like it or not. Yes, it’d be great if we could win now, and I would sell the farm to win now if possible, but with our financial situation, we’re limited to really, one big move, and I’m hard pressed to see any one player out there that would substantially change the dynamics for 2010.
This doesn’t mean I’m down on our chances in 2010 – rather, I think a lot of the improvement has to occur internally (namely, Soriano/Soto bouncing back, someone stepping up in the bullpen, Fukudome being consistent year-round, Theriot showing more 2008 than 2009 if he’s going to hit at the top of the lineup).
Look at our financial picture, though. We’ve got an aging core with a lot of money committed. Most of our key players are at stages of their career where they aren’t going to go up anymore. They might stay at their current level for a couple of years, but most of our guys are at the plateau. At some point, we need to be realistic about this core’s chances without damaging 2011-2015 chances.
I’m not suggesting we toss the bag on the next couple of years. For the right move, you still ponder making a swap and trading prospects. That said, primarily, I would let this string play out without making haphazard moves. Now, I’d be willing to ship 2 of our top assets away, along with a lot of other pieces, to try and land Granderson, but you have to draw the line at some point. I’m not suggesting a firesale either, but just let this current roster play out and let our kids develop unless the deal is too good to pass up. Our system’s got some talent and depth for the first time in about 4 years. Even if they don’t pan out, there’s value.
Again, for the right move, you ponder anything. But … I’m hard pressed to think there’s that 1 move out there, which is what we’re basically limited to this offseason, and as such, I’m just not supportive of the idea of shipping off Castro right now. His value will almost not drop dramatically due to the age and level he will be at next year. A potential solid shortstop is a good enough asset – a potential stud shortstop is a rare asset, and hence why I would hold onto him.
Well
first off, I made some awesome grammatical errors in that entry.
My only sticking point with Castro is he seems to have come out of nowhere and all of a sudden there is this groundswell of attention and hype that he’s somehow our Jimmy Rollins.
We’ve been successful with Theriot at short and theres every chance we can be again in 10, we just need Soriano and Soto to play a hell of a lot better and Ramirez to keep doing what he’s doing and Lee to fall somewhere b/t his past few seasons.
Im just not sold on a guy with such a short minor league record being a blue chip prospect all of a sudden, I think theres every chance he’s another product of a large market hype machine and we’d be better off going for it now and trading him for someone like Granderson, who may not be a panacea, but can certainly help….against righties anyway
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.
Castro
is without a doubt overhyped right now. That said, guys can certainly emerge within a year’s time. He didn’t really come out of no where either – he just elevated himself from an intriguing asset to the low levels to a potential elite asset.
That said, maybe he doesn’t pan out to the high projections some are suggesting. Thing is, I don’t think Granderson takes us from one level to another, and Castro’s value is unlikely to drop dramatically due to age and level (unless he absolutely bombs in AA/AAA). I just don’t think it’s worth it right now, considering that we’re at the in-b/w point, the end of this core, while looking to the beginning of another core.
I gotta disagree
One SS wont make the post-Ramirez post-Lee incredibly old Soriano phase any easier, especially since Castro wont be a run producer.
Theres probably more potential in Hak Ju Lee, who by many accounts has all the physical tools needed to succeed and is probably faster than Castro. So id give up Castro to get Granderson, hes certainly going to be more productive than Cameron or Byrd and he’s not 37 years old either, so he could help bridge the gap.
Fact is the 2010 Cubs need Carlos Marmol, they dont need Starlin Castro and we have to win now, so who will be a greater benefit next year, a CF in his prime and a lights out reliever (most of the time) or a 19 year old SS who might be a star three years from now?
Granderson might me shite against lefties, but he would make our OF better and would certainly be playing in a more hitter friendly park
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.
*might be*
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.
It isn't the issue of "one shortstop"
It’s the issue of making the best value judgment for now, and the future. I simply do not believe that swapping Castro for Granderson makes sense for the club now (2010 and 2011) and long run. That said, this conversation will go in circles.
The idea that Hak-ju Lee has more potential is a bit flawed – they are different types of players. Defensively, Lee is probably a better projection. Whereas Castro projects to move laterally real well, Lee could potentially be at another level. That said, Castro’s arm strength is far better. Offensively, Castro’s projection is a bit more diverse. He could end up as a run producer, or he could end up as a top of the order bat. Hak-ju Lee is strictly a top of the order projection if he succeeds.
See below
You know what youre getting with Granderson, you dont with Castro. And this team is built to win now and we have another SS prospect (Lee) with just as much intrigue and promise as Castro.
But I think its gonna be moot as we’re gonna have a 37 year old CF next year
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.
Gotta agree with Bren
Granderson should be around awhile being only 29 years old . Would solve the Cubs problem for great great glove and speed in centerfield . 30 homeruns last year .. That’s a run producer , has great speed in the basepaths .. And should hit this year for higher aveage .. And I have to agree with LOU , need some lefthanded bats as well .. Castro is two years off and is only a prospect . I would take the for sure thing


















