Rizzo or Fielder?

With the Darvish situation settled, it's time to figure out what to do with the biggest remaining hole (outside Starting Pitching) in the lineup - first base. With Yonder Alonso moving to San Diego, 1B prospect Anthony Rizzo is effectively blocked, making him a likely candidate for a trade. The other looming option is Prince Fielder. Both have their pluses and negatives. Who do you want at First for the forseeable future?

Should Prince Fielder or Anthony Rizzo be the Cubs' First Baseman of the Future?

5 months ago EcoGeek 29 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Did you mean to put a link in this fanshot?

If so, you should have used the “link” tab. The link above just links back here.

Join us for complete MLB coverage at SB Nation's Baseball Nation

by Al Yellon on Dec 20, 2011 8:58 AM CST reply actions

Nope, no link

Anywhere I’d link to would just be another site like this.

Just wanted to ask the question, see what people thought.

Personally, I’m intrigued by Rizzo, though I wouldn’t want to give up Garza for him.

by EcoGeek on Dec 20, 2011 9:07 AM CST up reply actions

Yesterday on CTL

Kaplan said he had been told (I know it’s Kaplan so take it for what ever it’s worth) that the Cubs are not going to spend the money going after Fielder.

by sue369 on Dec 20, 2011 9:25 AM CST reply actions

Then what the hell are they going to spend it on?

We don’t have a farm system flush with prospects, how are we going to improve the team, if not with cash?

by EcoGeek on Dec 20, 2011 9:27 AM CST up reply actions

Cespedes

by MDavis on Dec 20, 2011 9:30 AM CST up reply actions

Not a fan.

Plus, I need to see Soriano gone first, if that’s the case.

THEO!

by wrigleyrocker12 on Dec 20, 2011 9:41 AM CST up reply actions

But I also think he’s a bigger risk than Darvish was. With Darvish, you could see how/what he could throw, which doesn’t change too much with different batters/parks, but with Cespedes, his highlight reel came against what would be A/AA pitchers here in the US.

That said, Cespedes could likely be had for a fraction of what it would have cost to sign Darvish.

by EcoGeek on Dec 20, 2011 9:46 AM CST up reply actions

oh i wasnt saying i agree with that. i want fielder.

i was just saying, if they dont go for fielder, then imho its because they are that high on cespedes.

by MDavis on Dec 20, 2011 9:50 AM CST up reply actions

I don't think the two go hand in hand

If they are high on Cespedes, then they likely won’t go after Fielder. But not going after Fielder doesn’t necessarily signal that they are high on Cespedes.

Other alternatives would include:
- they want to instead spend on pitching
- they simply don’t want to be anchored into Fielder’s contract

by SouthernCub on Dec 20, 2011 2:48 PM CST up reply actions

ok, well i counter with what pitching is there to spend on?

you cant sit back and wait for a year, 50% or more of the big name guys next year will not see free agency.

by MDavis on Dec 20, 2011 3:13 PM CST up reply actions

An Arby's!!!

by daily2b on Dec 20, 2011 11:41 AM CST via mobile up reply actions

not to mention everday 1 reporter says the cubs are not interested

and another reporter says they are the front runner, and another says they are in the mix. so really, until fielder is signed by anyone, i won’t get upset.

by MDavis on Dec 20, 2011 9:32 AM CST up reply actions

Exactly.

Join us for complete MLB coverage at SB Nation's Baseball Nation

by Al Yellon on Dec 20, 2011 10:16 AM CST up reply actions

Is it just me or does anyone else want him to sign somewhere especially if its with the Cubs so it’s just over with?!?!?!?!?

Nothing happens unless it's first a dream

by puckishcubsfan on Dec 20, 2011 12:13 PM CST up reply actions

agreed, jsut get it done so we can move on to the next round of rumors

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 Dec 20, 2011 1:04 PM CST up reply actions

It's just you.

Join us for complete MLB coverage at SB Nation's Baseball Nation

by Al Yellon on Dec 20, 2011 1:10 PM CST up reply actions

I did say to take it

for whatever it’s worth. I know Kaplan’s word does not have a lot of value.

by sue369 on Dec 20, 2011 1:13 PM CST up reply actions

oh i wasnt saying one way or another.

its like you gov over to mlbtr and they have the “prince fielder update” and 4 bullet points involve the cubs with each one saying the opposite from the other.

by MDavis on Dec 20, 2011 1:30 PM CST up reply actions

gotcha :)

by sue369 on Dec 20, 2011 1:32 PM CST up reply actions

Frankly I'm torn.

I want us to go get Fielder. Its not my money, and I have no real idea what the total financial picture of the Ricketts’ is and will thus withhold comment on what a “smart buy” would be. However, I submit that the money spent on someone like him is likely recouped over time based on the added value his name and skillset would bring to the brand. Anyway…

But what if this Rizzo kid is the next “guy” so to speak? The jury is still out on this, yes? How cool would it be for Cubs to be the ones enjoying Rizzo coming into his own over the next few years. Better than missing in the FA pool time after time.

I think either scenario is great. If Rizzo gets here and sucks though, we’ll gripe about Fielder all year.

by Tat14 on Dec 20, 2011 10:24 AM CST reply actions

I agree with this almost completely...

My one caveat would be that I don’t want Fielder at any cost. If it’s gonna take an 8-10 year contract to sign him, or something north of $30 mil/year to bring it down to a more reasonable 4-6 years, Seattle can have him. We don’t need another Hendry signing. And with Boras in the mix, that may be exactly what happens.

by EcoGeek on Dec 20, 2011 10:28 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs

If it's 6 years,

the Cubs oe Jays get him. If it’s 8 or more, hr’s off to Seattle. Just a hunch.

10-25-2011. Theo Epstein joins the Cubs. Now, the fun begins.

by timh815 on Dec 20, 2011 12:11 PM CST up reply actions

Possible, I suppose.

Although his outside endorsement possibilities would be much higher in Chicago, or even Toronto (where he’d be sold to the entire Canadian market), than in Seattle.

Join us for complete MLB coverage at SB Nation's Baseball Nation

by Al Yellon on Dec 20, 2011 1:10 PM CST up reply actions

how bout 7 or 8 years with an opt out at 5 or 6?

if he performs like i think he will im very confident he opts out. see: CC Sabathia.

by MDavis on Dec 20, 2011 1:31 PM CST up reply actions

opts out see Aramis Ramirez

by Cubbie-Tim on Dec 20, 2011 2:54 PM CST up reply actions

exactly. 7 years with an opt out after 5, he sees it as getting one more big deal at age 32

we dont get stuck. or worst case, 7 years, hes off the books by age 34

by MDavis on Dec 20, 2011 3:23 PM CST up reply actions

I take some exception to the "its another Hendry-signing" school of thought.

By size of contract alone, we dislike Soriano. Follow-on thought process is that we should never ever spend big money again. Some argued in a similar fashion about Darvish based on the Dice-K and Fukudome showings.

Do we lump Prince Fielder into the same talent pool as Alfonso Soriano? He came off a great year with WAS before Jim went all in. But I don’t think Soriano was as good or held the same upside in 2007 as PF does right now. They are two different people from two different molds.

Just food for thought. I don’t buy into the “because of x we should never do y” argument. There may be a joke there somewhere.

by Tat14 on Dec 20, 2011 3:42 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs