Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: VIDEO: Veterans Share Favorite Sports Memories

Questions: CJ Wilson, Soriano as DH, Castro, labor agreement.


As always, thank you all in advance for your wisdom.

Star-divide

1. Should we sign CJ Wilson? This actually would have the chance to benefit us in two distinct ways.

First, it would shore up our SP, a position of great need on this team. Based on what you all have told me, Wilson is relatively young as a pitcher. He certainly is the best FA pitcher available, and arguably the only elite SP available.

Second, and perhaps more important, it drives up the value of Matt Garza. Teams desperate for SP including teams willing to overpay and who feel they are in contention now will be willing to pay more in prospects for a pitcher like Garza. It is clear that Epstein/Hoyer and considering moving Garza for the right package of prospects. Teams that otherwise would pay cash for Wilson will no longer have the opportunity to do it if we beat them out. Now they will be forced to overpay in prospects if they wish to contend this year.

Again, the FA pitching market is really weak this year, and is pretty strong next year. For teams that feel they are almost there, I think it would make sense to sign Wilson as it would give us the SP we need while allowing us to quickly rebuild the farm system. Most teams are nowhere near willing to part with a top value pitcher... because they can't just go out and sign a player like Wilson. We can.

2. What is Soriano's value as a DH? Is there a way of "calculating" how much better a hitter Soriano will project to be if he is a DH as opposed to LF? Or is he unlikely to be a more effective hitter as a DH?

In other words, does a player project to hit better if he doesn't have to field all the time. It would stand to reason that the answer would be yes, if the player does not need to field that he would have more energy and could spend more time focusing on hitting only, and perhaps also be less likely to be injured. Is there a "correction factor" that allows for one to calculate the projected improvement as a DH as opposed to being a position player?

3. I know this is likely to be considered heresy, but should be consider trading Starlin Castro? Before you all stone me, the only way to get top value in trades is to trade something of value in the first place.

Although I don't get to watch Cubs games all the time, Castro's value as a SS to me at least seems limited. His throwing accuracy is terrible. Cal Ripken used to say that he would be mentally exhausted after every game, and that being a SS requires a ton of mental concentration. I just don't see him being an elite defensive SS, and many are now starting to question if he should really be a 2B.

Yet he certainly could be sold as a potential SS which makes his value as high as possibly could be.

If a trade of Castro would net you several top prospects, especially pitching prospects, the question is do you do it. The team is in desperate need of SP and having SP can always keep you at least somewhat competitive. Now that his value is as high as it will ever be, do you consider trading him now? Do you all think he will really be that elite player that everyone thinks he will become?

4. I know there has been a lot discussed on this already in another thread, and I posted this question to the undeniably astute Josh77, but I wanted to get your all input on this also. I think I must be missing something.

With the new labor agreement, it would seem that the new system will allow the small market teams to ensure that they WILL get those top picks. I am having trouble seeing why everyone is so opposed.

The concern is that a team like, say, the Indians who pick before the Yankees might balk at signing someone they otherwise might sign because they know the agent is going to ask for a ton of money and they don’t want a bidding war while they lose their top pick.

The draftee, understanding that he is in high demand and that there is no cap on spending for prospects, can demand an outrageous amount that the small market team (Indians) cannot afford. So he drops down, not because he isn’t the best player available, but because the Indians don’t want to have him hold out and potentially get nothing with their top draft pick, and can’t afford to pay him what the agent is going to demand.

Draftee then falls down the board and some asshole team like the Yankees gets him who are willing to overspend, since a mistake to them does not cost the way it would a small market team.

For goodness sake, the Nationals almost lost out on Strasburg for this very reason.

More and more teams are understanding the importance of prospects, and without a system like this to prevent the Yankees and Red Sox (and yes, the Cubs) from distorting the draft also they way they have distorted the free agent market, this really was absolutely necessary.

I do realize that the Pirates and Royals spent more on the draft than any other team over the past couple years. However, I can also see this rapidly changing. The "rich teams" like the Yankees are seeing it pay off for teams even MORE than spending on free agents. Now that this formula has been shown to work you can bet they'll start overspending on draft picks in the very near future. This helps prevent that from happening.

While I think the parity in the NFL beats any other sport, I totally disagree with the drafting system. There have been several times teams have been “scared away” from signing the best available player because they knew the demands were too high.

I do think they need to give the small market and worst teams additional picks (not just some lame 6-selection lottery) or allow them additional resources to sign those picks.

It is great to hear that teams with losing records and smaller markets will get more money to spend on international signings. That is definitely a step in the right direction.

So after all that... the question is why does everyone think the new agreement is so unfair? Of course they should really have a salary cap but that will never happen (and actually hurts smaller teams who can trade an expensive player for prospects... which can't happen in the NBA where salaries have to "match"). I thnk this at least helps.

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.

Comment 27 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

My answers

1. No on Wilson. I’m just not sold on him as an ace/near-ace which is what his salary demands are. Unless he comes cheaper than the rumors, no.

2. Hard to tell whether Soriano would hit better as a DH. Some players don’t like sitting around waiting to hit. It depends on the player and whether they can handle it. If you believe the story, some of Adam Dunn’s issues were due to the change to a DH. Not sure I buy it but I can understand the different mind-set needed for a DH. As for his value, I expect the Cubs would need to pick up at least 2/3 of the deal to find a taker.

3. I wouldn’t say anyone should be untouchable but I’m not giving up on Castro at SS. He will be 22 next season. Let’s see him under a new professional regime before throwing in the towel. I think next year is key year for his future.

4. As for the new draft concern, yes the Yankees can do it. Boston has done it for years but the point is that the small market teams can at least compete with the bonuses offered by the big guys. I think it will take some time to see how the new rules play out. I do think that it will cause baseball to lose some top talent regardless of team as they can’t buyout two sport stars as easily as they can today.

John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?

by rlpete on Nov 29, 2011 5:24 PM CST reply actions  

I understand.

But it drives up the value of Matt Garza, since the teams with money will not have the option of simply buying a FA SP for this coming year.

Let’s say we overpay for Wilson. A team like the Yankees, who always feel that they must be in contention, will not have the option. As the FA SP market this year is very weak, they might overpay for an available SP such as Garza.

If overpaying for Wilson eventually leads us to be able to trade Matt Garza for two top prospects including Manny Banuelos and Dellin Betances plus others, would you feel that it is worth it then? Of course I have no idea if this is plausible. That said, teams get pretty desperate when they feel they are very close and SP is at a premium this offseason.

Would love to hear everyone’s view on this (even if it’s to tell me my idea is stupid). Thanks to you all for your input.

by nickler on Nov 30, 2011 11:13 AM CST up reply actions  

Why would a team like the Yankees want to overpay for Garza?

They will go after Wilson and drive the price. I understand that the Rangers may be a likely landing spot for Garza but why would we want to pay the Yankees over inflated price for Wilson to drive up the price for Garza. It doesn’t seem like we come out ahead that way. Maybe I am completely misunderstanding you.

I don’t want to play golf. When I hit a ball, I want someone else to go chase it.

by cub in louies nest on Nov 30, 2011 6:47 PM CST via iPhone app up reply actions  

TJ, I believe and hope your hope will be realized

It’s mostly a SWAG, but I believe Theo was able to get Ricketts’ approval for eating only one of two bad contracts, based on being a sunk cost. The team seriously needs SP, so releasing the untradable Zambrano makes little sense. Hence, Big Z was told he could ‘earn’ his way back onto the team. Regarding Soriano’s contract, clearly it’s a millstone around the Cubs’ neck for several more years. The FO wants to go deep into October by then, so a business case was made for trading Soriano now (eating approx. 2/3 of the contract), such that we can have a contributing left fielder by then. I’m sure you’ve read about other teams’ possible interest in Sori.

I enjoy this website because it's so interesting to see folks pole vaulting over mouse turds.

by BAMACOLONEL on Dec 1, 2011 7:32 PM CST up reply actions  

My View

1. Wilson is a very good pitcher. Considering he pitched in the Al and in a hitters park makes him intriguing. But at the same time I expect him to want way to many years for a 31 year old pitcher. I think he would be a good signing if the Cubs were close to competing but he would probably not be worth the money in a couple years when the Cubs are competing. Long term deals with pitchers never seem to work out.

2. Guys like Jim Thome and Big Papi still continue to hit so I guess it’s possible if it keeps him healthy. Although selling him as DH will make him less valuable. DH’s aren’t that high in demand.

3. Being able to develop star quality talent at SS is really hard to do. His potential is so high that it would be to early to think about trading him and getting the best offer.

by Mitchener on Nov 29, 2011 6:12 PM CST reply actions  

I'll try a few.
  • No to Wilson. Because he’s the only elite SP on the FA market he’s going to command way too much and more than he would get in a different offseason. He’s right around 30 I believe, so while his arm doesn’t have a ton of mileage he doesn’t project to get much better either. And how good is he really? I’m not sure he’s a true ace, but he’s going to be paid like one and he really struggled in the playoffs too.
  • I could see a team taking Soriano and paying 4-6 million a year for him, in which case I would pull the trigger. He would probably looked at as an average or possibly slightly above average DH. He can still hit you 25+ HR, but you can’t expect him to hit over .250 and we all know about the plate discipline. But if he’s traded (or Byrd for that matter), you have to find another outfielder somewhere. The only ready in house candidate MAY be LaHair in LF. I think he could possibly provide similar if not slightly better production and it’s not like he’s a huge downgrade on defense considering who he’d be replacing. I’d have liked Sizemore, but who knows, maybe we’re in for Cespedes or maybe Jedstein has a trade up their sleeves.
  • Castro still certainly could be a very solid defensive SS. There aren’t many guys out there with his combination of arm strength and range, and his problems occur in areas fixable with more repetition (hands, and especially footwork). Improve on these things and the arm accuracy will come. Go look at other good defensive SS and there numbers at similar ages, they all make tons of errors in their early 20s. Even Theo himself raved about Castro’s defensive potential and noted how many errors Jeter made early in his career. For every person suggesting to move Castro off of SS, there is another person saying how bad of an idea it is. The only scenario in which you move him off SS is if you magically acquire a SS who is already a strong and polished defensive SS.

As for trading Castro, I’d make him untouchable. Sure some people will say “nobody is untouchable”, think about it for a second. Even if we suck this year, why couldn’t we trade him for even more next offseason? Even then I’d be very reluctant. Castro still has four years before he can be a FA, and he should continue to improve every year. And so far we’ve seen improve not just in baby steps, but he seems to take huge leaps every year, continually exceeding expectations and progressing incredibly quickly. So even if we suck for two more years, think about his value after the 2013 season. He’d still have two full years left before FA. He’s still only going to be 24 in the 2014 season. And I could see him being a .320+ average, 15-20 HR, 20-25 steal guy in 2013 with at least slight plate discipline improvements and much improved defensive numbers at SS. A 23 year old coming off of that type of season would have even more value than what Castro has now, so even if we suck for two years we can still get a haul for him, and I’d say by 2014 we should be competing anyways. Not to mention it would not be good for PR and revenue if we were to trade Castro this off season. But the bottom line is I don’t want to see him traded because I think he is going to be really, really special and potentially an all-time great Cub by the end of his career.

by Dcr18 on Nov 29, 2011 6:40 PM CST reply actions  

Just for reference:

At 22, Jeter had 22 errors and a .969 fielding percentage. At 23, 18 and .975. At 24, 9 and .986.

Not saying he’s going to get to Jeter’s level, but let’s hold off the Castro-will-never-be-a-good-SS talks until he gets older. (Castro was 29 and .961 this past year)

by jpchi on Nov 29, 2011 7:36 PM CST reply actions   1 recs

I am not anti Castro but i have two worries in his game

one is his errors, both fielding and throwing, the other is his lack of walks/inability to take pitches. I am sure he can and sure hope he improves in both areas. If not this could get ugly in a few seaons

Chronologically inept since 2060
Q: Why did Chuck Norris cross the road?
A: Ditka
Ditka's mustache can kill two stones with one bird
It is better to spend money like there's no tomorrow than to spend tonight like there's no money! - Irish toast.

by Cubbie-Tim on Nov 30, 2011 7:26 AM CST up reply actions  

It may get ugly if he doesn't improve his defense.

But it wouldn’t be a disaster if he didn’t improve pitch selection much. Sure he really needs to if he’s gonna maximize his potential, but even if he doesn’t he’s still a good offensive player because of those great contact abilities. I wouldn’t say it gets ugly if he doesn’t improve, it would just be a shame because he’d be holding himself back from being even better.

As for defense, it absolutely has to improve, but he’s shown progress and improved on his fielding %. He still needs work, but with his physical tools, his improvements from this year, and the nature of young shortstops in general, I’m confident he’ll get to where he needs to be.

by Dcr18 on Nov 30, 2011 7:53 AM CST up reply actions  

with the high K rate and not being a true HR hitter

his offense has to improve as well, since his OBP needs to be much higher IMHO. I think we basically agree on this.

Chronologically inept since 2060
Q: Why did Chuck Norris cross the road?
A: Ditka
Ditka's mustache can kill two stones with one bird
It is better to spend money like there's no tomorrow than to spend tonight like there's no money! - Irish toast.

by Cubbie-Tim on Nov 30, 2011 10:35 AM CST up reply actions  

I'm not sure about "much higher".

I don’t see Castro ever having a great OBP. He is a free swinger so I don’t ever see that changing. He did show some better patience toward the end of the season. Hopefully that trend continues.

John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?

by rlpete on Nov 30, 2011 12:04 PM CST up reply actions  

Well agreed that his entire offensive game needs to improve.

That goes without saying. I’m not concerned with his K totals, and hopefully he can turn into a consistent 15+ HR guy. Hopefully higher batting averages and at least slightly improved BB rates can make him consistently have an obp around .370+

by Dcr18 on Nov 30, 2011 12:35 PM CST up reply actions  

My responses

1. I agree with those who are not sold on CJ Wilson as an ace. Considering what he’s likely to get on the open market, I’m not interested. I’ll repeat my plug for Mark Buehrle, even though some around here hate his guts for being an outspoken Ozziean.

2. I don’t think hitters values change much as being just a DH as opposed to playing the field. Edgar Martinez’s last season in the field at 29 he hit .343/.404/.544. He fell off the next two season due to injuries, but his next seven seasons as a DH were right in line with that.

3. I don’t know that we could get anything close to equal value for Castro. We could get a top veteran approaching free agency (Joey Votto?) but then we’d be looking at giving him a huge contract. Since he’s approaching free agency anyway, you’re giving up Castro for two years of Votto when we aren’t likely to win anything in the next two years.

You could also deal him for a package of prospects, but you’d never get anyone with Castro’s upside. You wouldn’t get one of the top prospects in the game (Trout, Harper, Moore) because those guys are untouchable. So then you’re looking at getting a bunch of B+ prospects, none of which have Castro’s upside.

4. I’ve said my piece on the CBA.

by Josh Timmers on Nov 29, 2011 8:10 PM CST reply actions  

Re: DH numbers

wouldn’t Edgar Martinez be a great example of a guy who probably wouldn’t have been able to put up his numbers if not for the DH? As you said, injuries were the primary cause for his dropoff in ‘93 and ’94. In ’95 he became a fulltime DH and his numbers went back to being great again. I wonder what kind of numbers Soriano would have put up over the past three years if he’d been able to be primarily a DH.

Staying healthy for Soriano is a huge key, and if he doesn’t have to play the field (and make all those extra hops) maybe his legs would hold up better.

"Enough foreplay- let's get crackin'"- Fred Garvin

by davidalanu on Nov 29, 2011 8:45 PM CST up reply actions  

Hard to say

The biggest reason they moved Edgar Martinez off of 3B was that he was a butcher out there and his injuries made him worse. His hamstring problems in 1993 came from running the bases, not playing the field.

Certainly the DH kept him in the lineup, as his defense wasn’t even adequate for first base. (A team would have sucked it up and put him at first for that bat, but it wouldn’t have been pretty.) But whether it made him a better hitter or simply gave him more consistent ABs, we’ll never know.

My personal opinion is that moving a guy from the field to DH does not improve their offensive production. If you want another example, check out Hideki Matsui, whose offensive production remained the same with his move to DH. I suppose you could have said that had they not gone to DH they would have been worse because injuries forced both Matsui and Martinez to move. But we won’t know. Maybe someone should do a study.

by Josh Timmers on Nov 30, 2011 12:43 AM CST up reply actions  

Nickler!!

Where have you been? For a second I thought you changed your name to jeffmills197xxxx, anyway…

CJ Wilson – meh. And I heard a rumor that he plans on doing a LeBron like “special” about where he plans to go. If this is true; pass.

Soriano – We don’t like him because of the money. His defense and speed continue to worsen. But, he did hit 28HR and 89RBI (IIRC), so as a DH he could work for someone. I pick Baltimore because that’s where former Cubs go to pasture.

Castro is just a young lamb, who had 200+ hits last year. He stays, we coach.

The CBA. Last week I went a bit too far in Josh77’s CBA thread; that is it frustrated me a bit more than a blog should anybody. Having said that, I have begun to think myself away from the luxury tax penalties of “$$$ good, draft picks bad” train of thought. This new deal may just lead to a better balance if rich teams value selections over a monetary penalty. Sure, youngsters may lose some initial money, but that doesn’t bother me too much.

Lastly, please quit being so humble in your posts. Noone else does it. Most of the folks that will snark at you rarely have anything substantive to say in the first place.

by Tat14 on Nov 30, 2011 2:44 AM CST reply actions  

Thank you all for your answers!

With respect to Wilson, I agree his value alone is not something I would want the Cubs to be saddled with…

… but there is the very tempting thought that it would take the only elite FA SP off the market, thereby making teams desperate for pitching to potentially overpay for Matt Garza. In effect, not only would it give us a very good (if not top notch) SP, but would also possibly net us a boatload of prospects for Garza since there would be no other FA SP available.

by nickler on Nov 30, 2011 11:06 AM CST up reply actions  

Ha ha ha ha

That is awesome.

Realistically, though, Soriano’s value is not high. Garza’s can be.

by nickler on Dec 1, 2011 1:55 PM CST up reply actions  

"Potentially" is the key.

Say the Cubs sign Wilson and then no one offers a great package of prospects for Garza. Signing someone just to help build up the value of someone else seems a little risky to me.

John Grabow - Who will pay you $4.8 million in 2012?

by rlpete on Nov 30, 2011 12:01 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't think you give that big of a commitment just to drive up another players cost.

And let’s say he re-signs with the Rangers for example. That would do the same thing in terms of driving up the price of Garza to other teams, you’d only have one less suitor.

by Dcr18 on Nov 30, 2011 12:38 PM CST up reply actions  

True.

I never thought of that.

by nickler on Dec 1, 2011 1:56 PM CST up reply actions  

I guess

I was always thinking the Yankees were going to get Wilson, and how can we essentially rip them off by beating them to it.

by nickler on Dec 1, 2011 1:57 PM CST up reply actions  

Some thoughts

1. cj wilson has proven himself to be a bonafide top of the rotation starter over the last two seasons and unless the cubs have concerns about his character or makeup and how that would play in chicago there is little reason not to make him a substantial offer as they don’t seem to have anyone in the system with wilson’s potential. of course, given the financial commitment you’d be making to wilson it would make little sense to turn around and trade garza to create another hole on your roster.

2. soriano is what he is at this point, and i think everyone knows that.

3. the cubs should not entertain the thought of trading starlin castro.

4. i don’t understand all the angst over the new CBA either.

by circuitclout on Nov 30, 2011 3:46 PM CST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Bleed Cubbie Blue, the Chicago Cubs blog for the SB Nation, created on February 9, 2005 by Al Yellon

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Maybe it's time to take a deep breath

Recent FanPosts

Small
Top 10 things I liked about watching the Cubs lose at PNC Park
Seinfeld_jerk_store_black_shirt_small
Cubs pitching problems answered!
Zambrano_background_2_small
What is the most likely move in June regarding current players?
Small
Draft Prep: Pierce Johnson
Small
Trying to be positive (need some help)
Small
Soriano back to Second?
Small
Javier Baez Peoria Bound?
Small
Draft Prep: Conference Tournament Version
Despite-an-inflated-babip-lahair-is-no-one-month-wonder
Suddenly, I feel your pain

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Former MLB PItcher Bob Ojeda On Pitching And Pain
Wrigley Field Supporters Propose Tearing Down Rest Of Chicago
Doug Glanville On His Teammate, Kerry Wood
Thanks.
Samardzija takes a dig at Hawk Harrelson

Recent FanShots

A Day In The Life Of An A-Ball Minor Leaguer
Baez to Peoria
2012 Stars and Stripes Hat
Sveum moves Castro back to #2 spot
OT: Tyler Colvin bats 2nd
The Pittsburgh Pirates Offensive Catastrophe
Roy Halladay Bobblehead Fail
Full sized image

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

Featured Poll

Poll
Should the National League adopt the designated hitter rule?

  1005 votes | Results

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 Chicago Cubs Game Threads

Yahoo_full_count

Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges


Managing Editor

Alyellontoppscard_small Al Yellon

Front Page Contributors

Profile_small Josh Timmers

B_w_avatar_small Brett Taylor

Marvin_the_martian_small Shawn Domagal-Goldman

Other Contributors

Toonmike_small Mike Bojanowski

Dsc_0139_small David Sameshima