Darvish & Caratini to the Padres for Zach Davies & 4 Rookie Ball Prospects

[CubinNY]

https://twitter.com/PWSullivan/status/1344315428575846407

I wonder what percentage of Jed's paycheck is for blatantly lying about ownership mandating a slash to the payroll

100%. He’s the Ricketts hatchet man.

[gflore34]

https://twitter.com/PWSullivan/status/1344315428575846407

I wonder what percentage of Jed's paycheck is for blatantly lying about ownership mandating a slash to the payroll

100%. He’s the Ricketts hatchet man.

Mind you this return for Darvish was the "best" he could do, doesn't that make you all warm and fuzzy about the future?

[Cubswin11]

I wonder what percentage of Jed's paycheck is for blatantly lying about ownership mandating a slash to the payroll

100%. He’s the Ricketts hatchet man.

Mind you this return for Darvish was the "best" he could do, doesn't that make you all warm and fuzzy about the future?

I do not like the return and not getting more certainty/closer to MLB guys. But there were some circumstances that made it understandable this was the best (assuming the ownership mandated moving him at all costs). Yu had a 12 team no-trade list, the Padres weren’t on it, if he picked the teams right that could’ve boxed them in. Basically if he picked all the other bigger markets/teams trying to win and they didn’t want to deal with a deal falling through to a NTC the Padres might have been the only team to deal with. It’s very easy the other teams not on the no trade list were basically the NL/AL Central teams, Marlins, Orioles, Red Sox, Rockies, Giants, Mariners, D’backs, Astros, As, Rays. None of those teams would trade for him.

[jmajew]

I haven't posted here in years, so first off, forgive me.

I do not mind this deal or dumping Darvish in general. My logic is simple. Whenever, the Cubs were going to go into a rebuild they were going to lose revenues and not be as profitable. 2021, because of the Pandemic, is going to be a very light revenue year. In the past few years it has become apparent that this team as currently constructed is not good enough to win another World Series. Management came to the conclusion that it was better to start the rebuild a year or two earlier than planned due to the Pandemic. If the pandemic wouldn't have happened I believe the organization would have allowed one more year of going for it, even though they knew in their hearts the team wasn't good enough. I believe this is why Theo left when he did. The plan was always to go for it through 2021 and then start the rebuild. The pandemic ultimately pushed it forward by one year.

I do not think the return for Darvish is that high, but I also look at FA right now and I personally don't think any FA is going to get a major contract this year. I'm spitballing here but I have a feeling Trevor Bauer will be had for less than 4/100. If that is the case what value does it really leave for Darvish? Wouldn't it be diminished? It does not sound like many teams were looking at him and willing to trade for him. The market just isn't there this year.

I know Jed is saying this wasn't money motivated, and I believe him when he says that. They knew the team wasn't good enough to win without big investments. They currently do not have the money to make big investments. So they were stuck in the no mans land of staying the course or modifying the course and rebuild. It is a bad sign for baseball in general that the value of Darvish was a low as it was.

[CubinNY]

I haven't posted here in years, so first off, forgive me.

I do not mind this deal or dumping Darvish in general. My logic is simple. Whenever, the Cubs were going to go into a rebuild they were going to lose revenues and not be as profitable. 2021, because of the Pandemic, is going to be a very light revenue year. In the past few years it has become apparent that this team as currently constructed is not good enough to win another World Series. Management came to the conclusion that it was better to start the rebuild a year or two earlier than planned due to the Pandemic. If the pandemic wouldn't have happened I believe the organization would have allowed one more year of going for it, even though they knew in their hearts the team wasn't good enough. I believe this is why Theo left when he did. The plan was always to go for it through 2021 and then start the rebuild. The pandemic ultimately pushed it forward by one year.

I do not think the return for Darvish is that high, but I also look at FA right now and I personally don't think any FA is going to get a major contract this year. I'm spitballing here but I have a feeling Trevor Bauer will be had for less than 4/100. If that is the case what value does it really leave for Darvish? Wouldn't it be diminished? It does not sound like many teams were looking at him and willing to trade for him. The market just isn't there this year.

I know Jed is saying this wasn't money motivated, and I believe him when he says that. They knew the team wasn't good enough to win without big investments. They currently do not have the money to make big investments. So they were stuck in the no mans land of staying the course or modifying the course and rebuild. It is a bad sign for baseball in general that the value of Darvish was a low as it was.

The Ricketts have all the money they need to do whatever they want 365 days of the year, every year for the rest of their lives and those of their children and grandchildren.

[Derwood]

It's going to be fun when 2024 rolls around and these guys are ready to play, but the Ricketts decide to not spend any money in order to fund Trump's campaign

[Backtobanks]

It's going to be fun when 2024 rolls around and these guys are ready to play, but the Ricketts decide to not spend any money in order to fund Trump's campaign

Speaking of Trump, I think we'll be getting a lot of lies and claims of fake news from the Cubs starting with Hoyer's claim that the Darvish trade had nothing to do with money. Stay tuned.

[Guancous]

The next collective bargaining agreement will likely reduce the incentives to play rookies.

How does this trade look if the Cubs only get five years of service instead of six?

[jersey cubs fan]

The next collective bargaining agreement will likely reduce the incentives to play rookies.

How does this trade look if the Cubs only get five years of service instead of six?

Won’t mean anything since these kids won’t be up until the CBA following that one.

[CubinNY]

The next collective bargaining agreement will likely reduce the incentives to play rookies.

How does this trade look if the Cubs only get five years of service instead of six?

Won’t mean anything since these kids won’t be up until the CBA following that one.

Or more likely out of pro baseball.

[CubinNY]

I haven't posted here in years, so first off, forgive me.

I do not mind this deal or dumping Darvish in general. My logic is simple. Whenever, the Cubs were going to go into a rebuild they were going to lose revenues and not be as profitable. 2021, because of the Pandemic, is going to be a very light revenue year. In the past few years it has become apparent that this team as currently constructed is not good enough to win another World Series. Management came to the conclusion that it was better to start the rebuild a year or two earlier than planned due to the Pandemic. If the pandemic wouldn't have happened I believe the organization would have allowed one more year of going for it, even though they knew in their hearts the team wasn't good enough. I believe this is why Theo left when he did. The plan was always to go for it through 2021 and then start the rebuild. The pandemic ultimately pushed it forward by one year.

I do not think the return for Darvish is that high, but I also look at FA right now and I personally don't think any FA is going to get a major contract this year. I'm spitballing here but I have a feeling Trevor Bauer will be had for less than 4/100. If that is the case what value does it really leave for Darvish? Wouldn't it be diminished? It does not sound like many teams were looking at him and willing to trade for him. The market just isn't there this year.

I know Jed is saying this wasn't money motivated, and I believe him when he says that. They knew the team wasn't good enough to win without big investments. They currently do not have the money to make big investments. So they were stuck in the no mans land of staying the course or modifying the course and rebuild. It is a bad sign for baseball in general that the value of Darvish was a low as it was.

The Ricketts have all the money they need to do whatever they want 365 days of the year, every year for the rest of their lives and those of their children and grandchildren.

I know this is a bleed post but, the Ricketts family gave millions of dollars to re-elect Trump. I have no time for PTR posts.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I haven't posted here in years, so first off, forgive me.

I do not mind this deal or dumping Darvish in general. My logic is simple. Whenever, the Cubs were going to go into a rebuild they were going to lose revenues and not be as profitable. 2021, because of the Pandemic, is going to be a very light revenue year. In the past few years it has become apparent that this team as currently constructed is not good enough to win another World Series. Management came to the conclusion that it was better to start the rebuild a year or two earlier than planned due to the Pandemic. If the pandemic wouldn't have happened I believe the organization would have allowed one more year of going for it, even though they knew in their hearts the team wasn't good enough. I believe this is why Theo left when he did. The plan was always to go for it through 2021 and then start the rebuild. The pandemic ultimately pushed it forward by one year.

I do not think the return for Darvish is that high, but I also look at FA right now and I personally don't think any FA is going to get a major contract this year. I'm spitballing here but I have a feeling Trevor Bauer will be had for less than 4/100. If that is the case what value does it really leave for Darvish? Wouldn't it be diminished? It does not sound like many teams were looking at him and willing to trade for him. The market just isn't there this year.

I know Jed is saying this wasn't money motivated, and I believe him when he says that. They knew the team wasn't good enough to win without big investments. They currently do not have the money to make big investments. So they were stuck in the no mans land of staying the course or modifying the course and rebuild. It is a bad sign for baseball in general that the value of Darvish was a low as it was.

The Ricketts have all the money they need to do whatever they want 365 days of the year, every year for the rest of their lives and those of their children and grandchildren.

I know this is a bleed post but, the Ricketts family gave millions of dollars to re-elect Trump. I have no time for PTR posts.

It's possible to understand that Cubs ownership is not hemorrhaging money and also understand that the front office is working within financial constraints. It's not being a Ricketts apologist to try to discuss the team within the practical limits that are there, regardless of the fairness of those limits.

[Backtobanks]

From Cubs Insider:

https://www.cubsinsider.com/2021/01/02/ ... ubs-plans/

This is totally insane. The Cubs never considered someone with his skills who is controlled for 5 more years while making the league minimum. "They didn't want to lock in someone at 2B for the next 5 years"? If Hoerner develops into a solid ML, he could take over at SS, if they decide to not extend Baez, move to CF, or trade from a position of strength to acquire what they need.

[big ball chunky time]

croenworth is 26 and would be in his 30s by the time the cubs are good again. also he probably sucks. As does Nico.

[sneakypower]

Cronenworth was 15th in xwOBA, i would've done backflips if he was part of the return
https://baseballsavant.mlb.com/leaderbo ... ype=batter

[jmajew]

I haven't posted here in years, so first off, forgive me.

I do not mind this deal or dumping Darvish in general. My logic is simple. Whenever, the Cubs were going to go into a rebuild they were going to lose revenues and not be as profitable. 2021, because of the Pandemic, is going to be a very light revenue year. In the past few years it has become apparent that this team as currently constructed is not good enough to win another World Series. Management came to the conclusion that it was better to start the rebuild a year or two earlier than planned due to the Pandemic. If the pandemic wouldn't have happened I believe the organization would have allowed one more year of going for it, even though they knew in their hearts the team wasn't good enough. I believe this is why Theo left when he did. The plan was always to go for it through 2021 and then start the rebuild. The pandemic ultimately pushed it forward by one year.

I do not think the return for Darvish is that high, but I also look at FA right now and I personally don't think any FA is going to get a major contract this year. I'm spitballing here but I have a feeling Trevor Bauer will be had for less than 4/100. If that is the case what value does it really leave for Darvish? Wouldn't it be diminished? It does not sound like many teams were looking at him and willing to trade for him. The market just isn't there this year.

I know Jed is saying this wasn't money motivated, and I believe him when he says that. They knew the team wasn't good enough to win without big investments. They currently do not have the money to make big investments. So they were stuck in the no mans land of staying the course or modifying the course and rebuild. It is a bad sign for baseball in general that the value of Darvish was a low as it was.

The Ricketts have all the money they need to do whatever they want 365 days of the year, every year for the rest of their lives and those of their children and grandchildren.

I know this is a bleed post but, the Ricketts family gave millions of dollars to re-elect Trump. I have no time for PTR posts.

I don't see the relevance of the amount of money they donated or how much we perceive them to have matters.

Do you think the team could have won a title as currently constructed without adding Trevor Bauer and a few other pieces at an extra 50-70 mil a year for the next 3-5 years? I personally do not. If you are not significantly increasing your odds of winning a title why spend the money and if you are significantly increasing your odds will the odds still be that much higher in years 2-5 of the contracts? If the answer is no I do not see a reason why to invest that money and why as a fan I'd want that. All you would be doing is pushing out the inevitable by a year but making the rebuild even harder. You invest heavily in FA when you have a young core under team control. It is a proven model that works.

[squally1313]

The Ricketts have all the money they need to do whatever they want 365 days of the year, every year for the rest of their lives and those of their children and grandchildren.

I know this is a bleed post but, the Ricketts family gave millions of dollars to re-elect Trump. I have no time for PTR posts.

I don't see the relevance of the amount of money they donated or how much we perceive them to have matters.

Do you think the team could have won a title as currently constructed without adding Trevor Bauer and a few other pieces at an extra 50-70 mil a year for the next 3-5 years? I personally do not. If you are not significantly increasing your odds of winning a title why spend the money and if you are significantly increasing your odds will the odds still be that much higher in years 2-5 of the contracts? If the answer is no I do not see a reason why to invest that money and why as a fan I'd want that. All you would be doing is pushing out the inevitable by a year but making the rebuild even harder. You invest heavily in FA when you have a young core under team control. It is a proven model that works.

Prior to Schwarber/Darvish, would you agree they were the favorites to win the division next year? Because if so, at that point there's not really a lot you can possibly do to 'significantly increase' your odds of winning a title.

That's not to say we can't be frustrated that the Ricketts more or less pocketed 5 years of historic success and the associated profits, then took one bad year (that was bad for everyone) and decided to tear it down. We just traded our best pitcher for a different version of Cubs era John Lackey and four dudes who won't sniff Wrigley for 4 years. How long do you think a team with the Cubs resources should need to rebuild?

[jmajew]

I know this is a bleed post but, the Ricketts family gave millions of dollars to re-elect Trump. I have no time for PTR posts.

I don't see the relevance of the amount of money they donated or how much we perceive them to have matters.

Do you think the team could have won a title as currently constructed without adding Trevor Bauer and a few other pieces at an extra 50-70 mil a year for the next 3-5 years? I personally do not. If you are not significantly increasing your odds of winning a title why spend the money and if you are significantly increasing your odds will the odds still be that much higher in years 2-5 of the contracts? If the answer is no I do not see a reason why to invest that money and why as a fan I'd want that. All you would be doing is pushing out the inevitable by a year but making the rebuild even harder. You invest heavily in FA when you have a young core under team control. It is a proven model that works.

Prior to Schwarber/Darvish, would you agree they were the favorites to win the division next year? Because if so, at that point there's not really a lot you can possibly do to 'significantly increase' your odds of winning a title.

That's not to say we can't be frustrated that the Ricketts more or less pocketed 5 years of historic success and the associated profits, then took one bad year (that was bad for everyone) and decided to tear it down. We just traded our best pitcher for a different version of Cubs era John Lackey and four dudes who won't sniff Wrigley for 4 years. How long do you think a team with the Cubs resources should need to rebuild?

Point taken. I think I'm the oddity that didn't think with Schwarber and Darvish we were good enough to win the division. I see it as being a crapshoot between the Cardinals, Cubs, and Brewers in 2021. I get the profits point, but you can show a profit and have poor cash flow. My guess is the cash flow hasn't been great because of all the investment they have done in the area. None of that really matters to me to be honest. I just don't think the team is good enough to win a World Series and I don't think we would have been good enough unless we invested heavily in the likes of Trevor Bauer and then completely remade our lineup so we don' rely as much on the long ball. If you expected Javy, Bryant, and Rizzo to all have bounce back years I could be on board. I think their are serious flaws in all of their games and the league has learned them. We are seeing the evolution of pitching against the three true outcomes and I think you will see teams readjust their approach again.

[squally1313]

I don't see the relevance of the amount of money they donated or how much we perceive them to have matters.

Do you think the team could have won a title as currently constructed without adding Trevor Bauer and a few other pieces at an extra 50-70 mil a year for the next 3-5 years? I personally do not. If you are not significantly increasing your odds of winning a title why spend the money and if you are significantly increasing your odds will the odds still be that much higher in years 2-5 of the contracts? If the answer is no I do not see a reason why to invest that money and why as a fan I'd want that. All you would be doing is pushing out the inevitable by a year but making the rebuild even harder. You invest heavily in FA when you have a young core under team control. It is a proven model that works.

Prior to Schwarber/Darvish, would you agree they were the favorites to win the division next year? Because if so, at that point there's not really a lot you can possibly do to 'significantly increase' your odds of winning a title.

That's not to say we can't be frustrated that the Ricketts more or less pocketed 5 years of historic success and the associated profits, then took one bad year (that was bad for everyone) and decided to tear it down. We just traded our best pitcher for a different version of Cubs era John Lackey and four dudes who won't sniff Wrigley for 4 years. How long do you think a team with the Cubs resources should need to rebuild?

Point taken. I think I'm the oddity that didn't think with Schwarber and Darvish we were good enough to win the division. I see it as being a crapshoot between the Cardinals, Cubs, and Brewers in 2021. I get the profits point, but you can show a profit and have poor cash flow. My guess is the cash flow hasn't been great because of all the investment they have done in the area. None of that really matters to me to be honest. I just don't think the team is good enough to win a World Series and I don't think we would have been good enough unless we invested heavily in the likes of Trevor Bauer and then completely remade our lineup so we don' rely as much on the long ball. If you expected Javy, Bryant, and Rizzo to all have bounce back years I could be on board. I think their are serious flaws in all of their games and the league has learned them. We are seeing the evolution of pitching against the three true outcomes and I think you will see teams readjust their approach again.

But...we just won the division. And it certainly wasn't Jon Lester leading us there. Sure, you need to fill innings, and find someone who can replace Jeffress' mirage of a season, etc. but those would be minor fixes (like, say, just bringing those dudes back, or getting younger, also dirt cheap versions of those players). And, since you mentioned bounce back years from Javy/KB/Rizz...that just kinda proves my point. We won in spite of them being ass, and you can't point me to a single thing those other teams have done to improve their rosters.

As far as profits, cash flows, whatever...I get that I'm oversimplifying it, but I also get that the Ricketts could start the process tomorrow on realizing that gigantic unrealized gain of team appreciation they're sitting on, and have zero problem in the midst of pandemic finding a willing buyer to more than solve all their problems. But they won't, because they know that continuing to own the Cubs will be incredibly profitable for them (and would remain that way with Darvish/Schwarber on the books, with a Bauer contract, etc).

[TomtheBombadil]

The more I look at this deal, the more I like it and consider the player mix brilliant. I think the worst case, call it a floor I guess barring catastrophe, is Davies posts a 2-3 WAR season for a losing team without being traded due to depth issues and one of these prospects becomes a fringe player while the others wash out. It's not hard to see this scenario playing out right now if the Cubs do nothing else. In my eyes, this is a *good* floor even if as the literal present it kinda sucks

It gets a whole lot more interesting and dynamic past the worst case. My favorite aspect is how the players behind Davies (a hedge onto himself, especially since he has or can have meaningful trade value) kinda hedge each other:

- Santana is your high probability MLer, he's going to see the show barring disaster thanks to his defense and decent plate approach. Given he's done this in a relatively short amount of time, he's only 20 and finished his 2019 season at 18, I think as soon as 2022 we'll know who the keeper is in this group if not this summer

- Preciado plays a similar role Noah Syndergaard did in the RA Dickey trade, a highly regarded young guy everyone kinda knows is the potential gem of the deal despite his lack of proximity to the MLs (and at the time Syndergaard was still trying to find breaking pitches)

- The two OFers *really* play off of one another well. They're both gigantic with as much track record of failure as pro success (none), but not more amateur failures than success, which kinda works in their favor given the ages. Caissie comes from a relatively strong draft bucket: the drafted at 17 YO position player from outside of the first, and old and new write ups seem more optimistic about his overall toolset than I think has been painted *since* the trade. Mena's bucket is more the glove first giant athlete, one that Kantrovitz and/or other members of the FO has called out as being underrated in the amateur markets and I think is generally true even at the ML level (see someone like DJ LeMaheiu, who as a prospect might have been boiled down to defense, contact, and frame, was still making positive adjustments in his late 20s early 30s)

Obviously I don't have the data and am way too lazy to piece together the content spread over years and outlets, but yeah all that stuff is out there and the more I look at this trade it's so clearly influenced by prospect data possibly collected over decades and trends that yeah...I'm so big on this deal

I swear I started thinking this way before the Lindor trade

[javy knows my name]

Petition to change the thread title to "...4 Slapdick Prospects"

[bjam12]

How would you feel about this if the Cubs surprised us all and signed Bauer?

[Sammy Sofa]

Infinitely worse.

[Bertz]

I do generally expect the team to reinvest Darvish's salary. For any negatives you can lay at Jed and Theo's feet, it's been rare that they've flatly lied to us.

So when Jed says this deal wasn't about money, while I don't think that's 100% true, I do think that means they didn't *need* to make this deal just for money. I'd guess that PTR's payroll allowance is at least nominally higher than the ~$170M payroll was at prior to the trade. That leaves enough room for a mid level guy (an outfielder probably), plus a few flyers for the bench and rotation.

I think that's why we're seeing smoke about a KB trade being imminent. If you wanted to maximize return, now's not really the right time. You wait until later in the offseason when Ozuna and Springer are off the board, or maybe even til the deadline. But if you move KB now? You have time/funds to do 3 mid level guys in FA rather than just one. An outfielder, and infielder, and a SP?

That or you're tearing it down to the studs.

[CubinNY]

I get the profits point, but you can show a profit and have poor cash flow. My guess is the cash flow hasn't been great because of all the investment they have done in the area.

The investments they've made in the area were not done by the Cubs, but a separate entity. They are using the Cubs to subsidize all their other ventures. You can not care about it, but it's what caused the trade. The Ricketts are acting like vulture capitalists right now with the Cubs. It matters a lot.