Wood for Marshall deal just a 'swing' deal?

by seeinginshades on Dec 21, 2011 1:13 AM CST

Long time reader...first time writer, wanting to get everyone's thoughts on an idea I had tonight. The Wood for Marshall deal we're hearing about all of a sudden didn't make sense to me at first: a high percentage fly ball pitcher is the type of young starter we're going to trade Sean Marshall for?

Then I remembered something I've been thinking about since the Latos deal the other day. It would seem obvious that 'JedStein' (love that nickname btw...shout out to whoever came up with it) want Rizzo from the Padres, but trading Garza to them is not something you would do to get Rizzo straight up. But I can't see the Pads trading anybody else of interest to us in a deal.

So, what if this Marshall/Wood deal is to get a young pitcher the Pads could control for 5 years, that would benefit from the move to PetCo Park's vast outfield, in order to swap him for Rizzo?

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.

Tweet Comment 36 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Interesting

You may be onto something.

by cubzfan on Dec 21, 2011 5:55 AM CST reply actions

That is a good idea.

A flyball pitcher has a lot more potential in Petco than in Wrigley.

就是今年！

by CubFanInChina on Dec 21, 2011 6:04 AM CST reply actions

Interesting thought.

by Dcr18 on Dec 21, 2011 6:47 AM CST reply actions

Nice insight. I could see this happening.

"We gotta circle the bandwagons." - Devin Hester

by Jose's Eyelid on Dec 21, 2011 7:22 AM CST reply actions

I hope your right

A back of the rotation starter and a couple suspect throw-ins seems ridiculously low for an elite LH set-up man. If fading prospect Todd Frazier is included I’m afraid the Rizzo deal gets shelved.

I'm wet nurse to a last-place, dead-to-the-neck-up ball club, and I'm choking to death!

by Eisman57 on Dec 21, 2011 7:25 AM CST reply actions

Don't forget it's trading a reliever for a starter

As great as Sean Marshall is, there’s only so much value a single bullpen pitcher has to the team (i.e. for Marshall maybe 1,5 WAR).
A league average starter that is cost controlled for 5 full years is actually a GREAT deal for a reliever with just one year left on his contract.

by DamageControlFreak on Dec 21, 2011 8:45 AM CST up reply actions 2 recs

WAR

He has exceeded that pretty easily the last two years.

Eamus Ursuli!

by WGNstatic on Dec 21, 2011 11:24 AM CST up reply actions

True

His WAR was 2.8 last year and is projected somewhere around 2 for 2011.
However, even he’d be worth 3 WAR, that’s still a LOT less than 5 yrs of cost controlled league average starting pitching.
Honestly, I don’t believe the Cubs can get away with this, they will probably have to give up more than just Marshall for Wood. The latest Rumors about Maoholm and Francis might indicate the Wood deal isn’t as close as it seems.

by DamageControlFreak on Dec 21, 2011 12:25 PM CST up reply actions

I think this is likely the OTHER likely option for this deal

I could also easily see this being the case, especially given the value put on prospects now with the new CBA. Trading a reliever and getting a cost control young pitcher with upside isn’t a bad deal in itself.

by seeinginshades on Dec 21, 2011 12:32 PM CST up reply actions

Re Frazier

I think he’d be fine as one of the two other pieces. He is a younger Jeff Baker who can play better defense. He would slot in at third, second, and outfield corners, not vs Rizzo at first.

by cubzfan on Dec 21, 2011 9:03 AM CST up reply actions

I would not be so sure

getting Rizzo is out. Cubs send Marshall to Reds for Frazier and Wood. The Cubs than send Wood to the Padras for Rizzo. Cubs end up with two young players with upside. Reds shore up their pen. Padras get SP lefty that fits their park perfectly.

by wild bill on Dec 21, 2011 9:18 AM CST up reply actions

This is exactly what got me thinking what I did

To me, wild bill, what you said sounds to me like a Jed Hoyer/Theo Epstein style proposal.

by seeinginshades on Dec 21, 2011 12:33 PM CST up reply actions

Even so

the Cubs could sweeten the pot. I would think Marshall would not be enough for those two. But I am sure the Cubs could add a name or two to get that done.

by wild bill on Dec 21, 2011 3:30 PM CST up reply actions

its an interesting thought

but why wouldnt the padres have just asked for him in the deal with latos????

follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com

by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 21, 2011 8:44 AM CST reply actions

Could be

the Reds all along wanted Marshall. The Reds would not let go of him at the point of the Latos trade. For the Reds they gain Latos and Marshall. Seems like a win-win-win for the three teams.

by wild bill on Dec 21, 2011 8:56 AM CST up reply actions

Sorry

I am referring to Wood in my second sentence.

by wild bill on Dec 21, 2011 8:58 AM CST up reply actions

seems like Latos would be a greater priority than Marshall

so if the Padres really wanted Wood, the Reds would’ve been more inclined to move Wood in that deal to ensure they got Latos than to hold back planning on deploying him for Marshall

Like i said, the thought is an interesting one and a good “connect-the-dots” thought, but it would seem pretty likely that if the Padres were super interested in getting Travis Wood they could’ve done it through their initial trade.

I’m not saying they aren’t interested. I’m simply saying it makes little sense that the Padres asked the Cubs to go out and get Wood so he could be flipped when they were just negotiating with the Reds and could’ve found a way to include him in that deal

follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com

by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 21, 2011 9:41 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs

But...

The Reds got Latos without giving up Wood. Maybe they would have included him if they needed, but tried to hang on knowing Epstein is a fan. This is kind of far fetched, but you never know.

by okiecubbie on Dec 21, 2011 11:05 AM CST up reply actions

Yeah...we'll never know what went down in the Latos trade negotiations

But, what I’d pieced together in my thoughts was that the Reds told the Padres: You can have Wood, but you won’t get Yasmani Grandal (or something to that effect). It left the Padres still wanting Wood, who really would be served by pitching in PetCo.

by seeinginshades on Dec 21, 2011 12:35 PM CST up reply actions

Could

be the Padras did not have the value of a Marshall in order to snag Wood.

by wild bill on Dec 21, 2011 3:32 PM CST up reply actions

FINALLY.

I sifted through the first 20 comments waiting for this.

Doesn’t make any sense to me. If Wood was somebody the Padres wanted, he would have been in the Latos deal.

by mic on Dec 21, 2011 8:34 PM CST up reply actions

I like the way you're thinking.

We'll miss you Big Boy. #10 is going into the Hall of Fame!!

by mrcubsfan on Dec 21, 2011 8:56 AM CST reply actions

Interesting idea

But grabbing Rizzo means we’re out of the running for Fielder, and I don’t know how I feel about that…

by EcoGeek on Dec 21, 2011 10:07 AM CST reply actions

I don't think

these swing deals happen very often in baseball. Plus Epstein tried to get Wood when he was still with the Sox. It appears he likes him.

by tomas21 on Dec 21, 2011 10:18 AM CST reply actions

Not an unreasonable thought...

…but Dartmouth’s point above resonates, and I’m thinking this trade may be more about a very cost-savvy way of not having to sign a Paul Maholm (whom I’ve advocated to a certain extent) or taking a flyer on a Joe Saunders.

"[The Cubs] have a very famous tradition in baseball, and it will be nice to be part of turning it around." ~ Jamie Quirk, Bench Coach

by daver on Dec 21, 2011 10:28 AM CST reply actions

Are you

Deep Goat?

by Tat14 on Dec 21, 2011 11:06 AM CST reply actions

HA!

Would you believe me if I said Yes?
How about if I told you No?

by seeinginshades on Dec 21, 2011 12:36 PM CST up reply actions

I can understand the desire for Hoyer/Epstein to get a pitcher they've liked before...

But, the problem is that just because they liked him before doesn’t mean that prospect still makes sense now that they are with the Cubs. Hoyer (at PetCo) and Epstein (at Fenway) ‘liked’ certain players mostly because of how they potentially fit on their respective ballclubs, but also by how they projected to play in them. That changes now that both are designing a club to play in Wrigley. An extreme fly ball pitcher (and I believe 2/3s of Wood’s hits given up went into the air) just doesn’t seem to project to me in Wrigley.

by seeinginshades on Dec 21, 2011 12:40 PM CST reply actions

then again, they liked DeJesus, and they liked Crisp.

neither guy really fits the “young, build for the future” mold either. and yet DeJesus is patrolling RF and Crisp is drawing interest.

by MDavis on Dec 21, 2011 12:51 PM CST up reply actions

Time may prove you right...

…but I’d point out that Wood did manage to control his HR rate in GABP and, getting a bit further afield, many said Ted Lilly would never succeed at Wrigley with his fly ball tendencies and he did OK.

"[The Cubs] have a very famous tradition in baseball, and it will be nice to be part of turning it around." ~ Jamie Quirk, Bench Coach

by daver on Dec 21, 2011 12:53 PM CST up reply actions

And both of you make a great point...

We don’t know what Hoyer and Epstein are really planning yet. So who knows? I think, no matter what happens, that I’d like to see the Cubs get Rizzo. So, if it’s Wood that gets traded for him, or Cahsner or McNutt, as Ryno G mentions below…I think he’s worth it to make the Cubs better.

by seeinginshades on Dec 21, 2011 1:21 PM CST up reply actions

I'm not sure.

I’ve heard Padres wants Cashner or McNutt, which is no surprise. They’ve always liked Cashner. I wouldn’t be opposed to giving up McNutt, as I believe Rizzo is a better overall prospect.

by Ryno G on Dec 21, 2011 1:12 PM CST reply actions

Are fly ball pitchers really a no-no at Wrigley?

When the wind blows in, the ballpark plays large. Plus Wood has been pitching in a bandbox in Cincy.

And with the infield defense as it is, I’m not sure I’d want too many groundballers on the staff.

"We gotta circle the bandwagons." - Devin Hester

by Jose's Eyelid on Dec 21, 2011 2:01 PM CST reply actions

So who's going to be the go-to lefty in the pen now?

Help bring Boys of Spring The Movie to life!

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1742828131/boys-of-spring-the-movie

by BeerCub on Dec 21, 2011 4:57 PM CST reply actions

Russell

but used more as a LOOGY. And then there should be competition between Maine, Gaub, Beliveau, and Rusin for another lefty spot. If Travis Webb is also in the deal from Cinci, throw his name in there, too. And then maybe a non-roster ST invite to a veteran lefty.

by cubzfan on Dec 21, 2011 5:13 PM CST up reply actions

There is a lot of time left in the offseason and I am sure we will start the season with a balanced team.

I don’t think our team will be good but it will be on a trajectory for improvement. If we increase by 5 or six wins each year over the next few seasons and have a top-notch minor league/international system…the Cubs will be a force to be reckoned with for many successive years.

就是今年！

by CubFanInChina on Dec 21, 2011 7:01 PM CST up reply actions