Quantcast

In a trade that will be discussed at length in the coming days in baseball circles (and, given its scope, probably around here, too), according to multiple reports, the Marlins just sent everyone – I don’t use that hyperbole lightly – to the Blue Jays for a variety of prospects, and a whole lot of salary relief.

The damage:

The Blue Jays get Josh Johnson, Mark Buehrle, Jose Reyes, John Buck, and Emilio Bonifacio. They also get a modest $4 million in cash tossed in.

The Marlins get Yunel Escobar, Adeiny Hechavarria, Justin Nicolino (a nice pitching prospect), Henderson Alvarez, probably Jake Marisnick (a very nice outfield prospect), Anthony DeScalfini (another nice pitching prospect), and Jeff Mathis.

The money aspect is being sorted out, but you can expect that the Blue Jays are taking on most of the salary, given the prospect return (which is good, but not great). The Marlins clearly just wanted out from underneath the contracts of Buehrle and Reyes … they guys they signed last Winter. (Recall, they’ve already dumped Heath Bell.)

The implications of the deal for the Cubs are relatively simple: the deal takes the Blue Jays out of the trade market for a starting pitcher (like Matt Garza, for example), but it also takes them out of the market for middle tier free agent starting pitchers, which they’d been rumored to be pursuing. All in all, it’s a slight net win for the Cubs, but obviously a very small one.

The implications for MLB, obviously, are much greater. The immediate reaction has been, in large part: shame on the Marlins. They baited taxpayers into paying for a luxurious new stadium, bought a bunch of free agents on back-loaded deals that everyone knew they would eventually dump, couldn’t fill the stadium, and in just one year, indeed did the dumping. Because the stadium deal for Miami had already looked ugly, I don’t think it will be used as additional ammo against publicly-financed renovations to Wrigley Field (more than it would have been already, I mean). But it doesn’t help.

UPDATE: I should add that this deal hasn’t been confirmed by the teams yet, though (all jokes aside) it seems like a done deal … pending MLB’s reaction. I have a hard time seeing MLB shoot down a trade in the best interests of baseball, but this might come close, given the negative near-term impact it could have in Miami.

  • cubsklm

    The Marlins should’ve insisted on including that freaking ugly statue in center field be sent to Toronto as part of any deal!

  • TC

    Offer them Vogelbach, Lake, and Vizcaino for Stanton. Right now

    • Randy

      They should give up any prospect to get Stanton. He is only 23 and would fit nicely in RF.

      • Tim

        They’re going to keep Stanton. Hes still young enough to where he could be in the minors. Hes part of their “future”

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      The Marlins would chuckle and pat the Cubs on the head.

      • Tim

        it would take soler, almora, and baez to get Stanton in my opinion

        • JR

          I could see that. I think Stanton is probably 3rd to Harper and Trout as the most valuable player compared to contract in baseball. But the Marlins are nuts, so who knows with those guys..

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          And at Soler, Almora, and Baez, I pass.

          • Tim

            Couldn’t agree more

          • JR

            Yeah considering the Cubs are way more than 1 player away that would be stupid. But if I was a team that was close I would gladly give up my top 3 prospects for Stanton.

        • Kyle

          I’d do it for those three in a heartbeat. I’d probably give them Vizcaino, too.

          • Can’t think of a cool name

            I agree, I’d give soler, almora and stanton.

            • Can’t think of a cool name

              Oops , Baez.

        • Spencer

          I would trade two of those three to get Stanton.

  • CHITOWNGUIDO23

    Stanton/Almora/Soler

  • JR

    My question is why would the Blue Jays have interest in those backloaded contracts anyway? If they wanted those dudes why didn’t the just sign them in the first place when they were free agents. Now they have to give up prospects and still take on crap contracts. Seems weird.. And Miami is just ridiculous.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      They were probably outbid by Miami and their ridiculous offers of backloaded contracts.

      • JR

        I guess. Maybe Anthopoulos sees a window with Boston trading away their team and the Yankees getting old finally. Or maybe he’s feeling some serious pressure to win in 2013. Either way, pretty risky imo.

        • http://casualcubsfan.blogger.com hansman1982

          Bingo. Right now the Jays and Orioles have a 3 year window before the Red Sox come back on strong – need to make hay while the sun shines.

  • Ch1town23

    Soler and almora for Stanton…. No way that’s two of top three prospects… I like lake volgelbach

  • abe

    I think the guy was saying how our outfield would look in 2014

  • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

    Keep in mind that if Stanton is traded (and I have no doubt he’s pushing hard for one about now), every team in baseball will be trying to land him. The Cubs have the prospects to do the deal, but they may not have the prospects the Marlins are looking for.

  • the jackal

    i think we should focus on pitching whats every one think bout nolasco?

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      I’d check the asking price. If the Cubs could land him for a fringe guy and a pile of cash, I’d do the deal.

      And then eat the salary and flip him for a better prospect at the deadline if the Cubs are out of it.

  • Sanchez

    Vitter’s,jackson,and (???) for Stanton

    • trevor

      vitters and jackson arent too valuable/coveted anymore. itd take at least almora soler or baez maybe 2 of 3

      • Sanchez

        The only thing about stanton is that he had an injury earlier in the year , mabye almora and soler , They have bright future’s but they wouldnt have the power stanton has but I think the marlins would want more

  • Cubs1967

    here’s a hint for jedai………….
    bjax
    maples (he of the 10 IP since drafted)
    lake
    jose paniugua (since none of the prospects lists have him in the top 15)

    FOR

    Giancarlo ‘don’t call me Mike” Stanton

    but with jedai…………NO FUKING CHANCE

    • DarthHater

      This could happen only if the Marlins were as imbecilic as you.

      • Spencer

        It’d be great if you could offer a reply without insulting someone in the process.

    • Chase S.

      Sorry but any credibility that you may have had before (which probably wasn’t any) just went out the window with that trade suggestion…

  • JCubsfan79

    Cubs get: Mike Stanton and Adam Conley
    Marlins get: Matt Garza, Javier Baez, Josh Vitters, Junior Lake, Matt Szczur and Trey McNutt

  • http://It'searly Mike F

    I always get a laugh when people talk about trades. They want to get something for nothing. What is missing here is you have to give something to get something. And in this instance, teams have been giving some young talent cost controlled for monster contracts. Talent for money. In other words Boston and Miami sold large contracts for younger prospects and took less in talent to relieve themselves of the financial burden.

    So many here are wanting the same thing without the money. Of course that is goofy. I will never forget the Smith Templeton deal and the instant analysis…. You always give something to get something. So is there a trade that would help both teams and make sense for both. Yes I think there is. The Cubs could send Casto to Miami for Stanton. Miami I’m certain would love a young affordable latin star. I might take a little more, maybe a young pitcher, maybe not, but anyone thinking Miami would trade Stanton for two A ball level prospects needs to think again.

  • Old school

    The Marlins may have figured out the fastest way to reload their farm system. Buy players, backload their contracts and dump. It’s been done by them on three different occasions now. By the by the have a couple more WS appearances and wins then the beloved.
    The BlueJays did pretty good on this one. Sure they got some bad contracts but added some real talent quick. All those former Marlins would take starting slots from the Cub’s incumbent.

  • Derrick

    I would trade anyone on our roster for Stanton he is that good and only 23, including Castro sry. If they want Baez,Almora and Soler done with no hesitation. Imagine a core of Stanton/Rizzo/Castro. Realize we hope that Almora or Soler can develop into someone like a Stanton. In the end I think he stays put we should kick the tires on Nolasco though.

    • Kyle

      Stanton just turned 23 last week, and he’s already basically what it would look like if you combined the ceilings of Soler and Baez. If he’s available, you do a reverse-Dawson and offer the Marlins a blank trade, where they fill in their side.

      • JR

        I thought we couldn’t trade Almora this offseason? And Soler makes a ton of dough so I don’t know how much of prospect value he has. When all we did was outbid everyone for him last summer. But I would do Soler and Baez for Stanton, sure.

        • Kyle

          You’re right, it’s all just hypothetical because the Marlins wouldn’t trade him anyway.

          Like I said in the other post, if Stanton is available, just offer the Marlins a blank trade sheet to fill in.

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

            I’m not so sure Miami won’t trade him. He’s not happy and he’s going to want out. So they have that do deal with. And they have a rookie manager; do they really want a grumpy star under a rookie manager?

            Also, how much will Stanton cost when they are ready to compete? This is a team in full blown rebuild. They could turn it around in two years, I suppose, but I have my doubts. It’s not like they blew up a World Series winner this time. Purged of the high priced talent, they are starting with the spare parts of a bad team… plus Stanton.

            If they could land three to five high end prospects that figure to arrive in their window of competition, I think they pull the trigger. Sure, they won’t get any one player back who is better than Stanton, but it might be worth it in the long run.

            I’m not predicting he goes, but it would not surprise me. He’s the kind of guy you want to build around, but he’s also the kind of guy that can bring in a ton of talent for a full rebuild in a hurry. If I’m the GM, I put him on the market and see what the offers look like before I make any final decisions on his fate.

            • Kyle

              “Also, how much will Stanton cost when they are ready to compete? ”

              This sort of question just makes me want to bang him head against the desk until I pass out.

              Any team with rebuild plan, be it for the Marlins or Cubs, that can’t find room for Giancarlo Stanton at any price short of $100 million/year should just fold up their franchise and fold. Seriously. He just finished his age *22* season.

              • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

                Completely agree. But we’re talking about the Marlins here. The team that gave up on a rebuild one year into the rebuild in favor of another rebuild.

                I have no idea what the budget in Miami moving forward is, but I bet it isn’t much. For example, if they are planning to have a payroll under $50mil when they are finally back in contention, and they project that Stanton will cost $25mil in that particular year, and they don’t see a way to field a competing team around him for $25mil or less, then they need to move him for as much as they can get.

                Or they need to move the franchise out of Miami.

                Or they need to give themselves a chance to build a fan base before they gut the team and alienate the few fans they had.

                • Kyle

                  If I had $50 million to spend, and I had the chance to get Giancarlo Stanton in his prime for $25 million, assuming he continues on a normal development path, I might just think about taking my chances with Stanton and 24 $1 million-players.

                  He’s the closet thing to a young Pujols we have in the league right now.

                  • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

                    That has the makings of an interesting stats project. I’ll have to keep that one in mind (if someone else doesn’t beat me to it(.

                    • andoalex

                      You can start with that he is one of three active players to have a SLG over .600 before the age of 23. The other two are Pujols and Rodriguez. Pretty elite company.

            • Can’t think of a cool name

              I know we’ll probably never know, but please Jed just ask. Half of getting what you want is asking

          • http://casualcubsfan.blogger.com hansman1982

            Ya, their front office has already said no to Stanton. But ya, Garza (for free even), Baez, Watkins, Jackson, Villanueva

  • Tyler

    Ken Rosenthal said that Ricky Nolasco could be the next Marlin to be traded. Should the Cubs be interested there? He’s signed through next year, and could come relatively cheap prospect-wise for the Cubs if they offer salary relief.

    He could be flippable at the deadline, but is also only 29, with all the peripherals going in the right direction. While his ERA isn’t great, his FIP has always been above average, he doesn’t give up many homeruns, and his GB/FB rate has been going up every year.

    So who thinks the Cubs should inquire on Nolasco?

    • Van

      He could be flippable at the deadline, but is also only 29, with all the peripherals going in the right direction.

      I don’t dislike Nolasco, but for the past 4 years his K/9 has been declining while his WHIP has increased and walk rate has stayed pretty much constant. He’s a fine mid rotation guy, but I think what you see is what you get. Maybe we’re just looking at different numbers?

  • Fastball

    I don’t care what the Marlins do or have done. Its how they choose to approach baseball ownership. They have a WS and we don’t. So until we get one I can’t throw stones. If they wouldn’t have hire Ozzie they may have been successful. They took a chance and I give them credit for having the balls to do so. Didn’t cost them much. Toronto owns it now.

    • whiteflag

      I guess you do have to give them credit for taking a shot, but I think it cost them a lot. They alienated their already fleeting fan-base and their players. Not to mention, future free-agents are probably going to think twice about signing there.

  • Fastball

    Cubs will never do a trade for Stanton. If it went wrong it would be a career limiting move for Thed

    • Jarder

      Because going after a guy that could sneeze 35 homeruns is career limiting.

  • Fastball

    Yep. if Stanton flopped in Chicago it would be.

  • Fastball

    I don’t think he has the nerve to trade the players it would take to get Stanton. Hope Im wrong but we will never find out. I will never happen!

  • Sanchez

    As much as I like stanton , I wouldnt want the cubs going for him because the marlins would most likely want more than almora,baez and soler for stanton

  • http://It'searly Mike F

    The starting point for Stanton would have to be Casto, apple to smaller apple, unless you’re a Cub fan. Probably takes more. Were I the Marlin’s GM, I would propose Stanton for Castro, Shark and Almora and settle for Castro and Shark.

    • King Jeff

      With Castro already signed long-term and Shark being arbitration eligible, they are probably both out of Miami’s price range. Of course, they’d just turn around and trade them both away as soon as they could, so they might be interested.

  • Dumpgobbler

    I doubt Miami would do Castro for Stanton straight up. They may do something like Stanton and Nolasco for Baez, Almora (If he can be a PTBNL) Vogelbach +. I’d think that would make more sense for them. They’d need two top 50 guys, plus more interesting guys like Vogelbach and more, while having us eat all of Nolasco’s deal.

  • Kyle

    cubs still looking at haren? i dont think they should get rid of soler

  • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

    It’s probably worth asking if Miami is even willing to take on Castro’s salary right now. I honestly wonder what their 2013, 2014, and 2015 budgets look like. I’m not convinced the baseball people are running the show down there right now.

    • Richard Nose

      espn just displayed that they have something under $30 mill committed for next year. Obviously that can’t go unchanged.

      • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

        It’s probably going down. Nolasco is owed $11.5 million, and I’d be stunned if he weren’t traded.

        • Spencer

          Just over 30% of their committed salary for one dude with one year on his K left? He’s gotta be gone I think.

    • Spencer

      There aren’t a lot of guys I would consider trading Castro for, but Stanton is one of them. It’s gotta be at least worth a look, as you suggest.

  • Ted
  • ssckelley

    No way are the Cubs in position to trade a way all their top prospects for 1 player. If they were putting themselves in position to win in 2013 I could see it happening. But not when they are in the process of building a consistent winner. The Cubs are more than a Stanton away from competing next season.

    • Richard Nose

      Stanton’s 23 yrs old. I agree with your general thought, but Stanton has 12 years of filth left.

      • ssckelley

        If the asking price is Almora, Baez, and Soler then no. The Cubs are not in position to trade their top 3 prospects as they are still building the farm system. Once the team is winning and the farm system turns into a pipeline then absolutely.

    • Spencer

      Yes. That’s true. But Stanton wouldn’t be under team control for just 2013, so what difference does it make how competitive they are going to be in 2013 when the Cubs would have him for all of his arb years, when the Cubs presumably would be in their competitive window (assuming they don’t have to sell off the whole farm system to get Stanton)?

    • Kyle

      You do realize that Stanton *just* turned 23 less than a week ago. If he was hitting 37 HRs in AA at that age, people would be spazzing out trying to get him.

      One Stanton is better than our best three or four prospects even on the “rebuilding” scale.

      • MichiganGoat

        I agree here but the question is which prospects do they want, if it would only take Almora and Solar plus a handful of other good prospects I’d say go for it but if it takes our top 5 prospects I’d be more hesitant.

      • ssckelley

        Is Stanton going to lead the Cubs to the World Series in 2013?

        • Kyle

          Does he mysteriously disintegrate after 2013?

          • ssckelley

            It was a yes or no question.

            If Stanton makes the Cubs a contender next season then you make this trade and not think twice about it. But he won’t, you know it as well as I do. The Cubs cannot afford to trade away their farm system when they have so many holes to fill.

            But to answer your question, no, he does not magically disappear after 2013. (see how easy that is?)

            • Kyle

              “It was a yes or no question.”

              So was mine.

              “If Stanton makes the Cubs a contender next season then you make this trade and not think twice about it. But he won’t, you know it as well as I do. The Cubs cannot afford to trade away their farm system when they have so many holes to fill.”

              That’s simply an incorrect assertion. Even for a rebuilding team, Stanton is far more valuable than a pile of our best prospects.

              I don’t understand this fetish for the “farm system.” Stanton is a better “prospect” than all of our prospects put together, he just happens to play in the majors.

              If you could magically combine the best attributes of Baez and Soler at the plate, and had a magic “accelerate through three years of development and hit the highest estimate of their ceiling” button, the resulting player would be almost as good as Giancarlo Stanton.

              • ssckelley

                I get what you are saying, if the Cubs were only missing 1 Stanton to be a contender next season I would be all over it. But they are not and trading off the farm system at this point could be devastating to the long term success of the team. The goal is not just to compete for 1 season, the goal is to make the Cubs a winner consistently and you need a good farm system for that sustainability.

                • Kyle

                  No, you don’t get what I’m saying.

                  Ignore 2013. Ignore 2014.

                  If you had to choose between our top 4 prospects and Giancarlo Stanton for 2015-2020, you should choose Giancarlo Stanton.

                  • ssckelley

                    Yes I do get it, but you are trading the farm system to get that 1 piece. Soler, Almora, and Baez are going to help the Cubs in 2014. Either as players on the Cubs roster or as trade commodities to fill the holes you have in 2014/2015.

                    The Cubs have way to many holes to trade the farm system for one player that plays a position that is one of the easiest to fill through free agency.

                    • Drew7

                      Those 3 *may* help the Cubs in ’14/’15, but most thought the same would hold true for Brett Jackson a couple of years ago.

                      By this time next year, any or all 3 of those guys may have flaws exposed as they are promoted through the system.

                • Drew7

                  The entire point of a good farm system is for it to give you quality big-league players. If that system produces enough value to get you a very young and proven ML-slugger, you make the trade.

                  If you pass on trading 2 or all of Almora /Baez /Soler, you would need at least 2 of them to not only make it (which we know isn’t anything close to guaranteed ), you would need both to hit their ceilings to equal the production Stanton would most likely give you for years to come.

            • Spencer

              why are you looking at it in such black and white terms? What’s wrong with acquiring pieces that will help the club beyond 2013 just because they won’t be competitive in 2013? I don’t understand this at all.

              • ssckelley

                I am not, but even beyond 2013 the Cubs are going to need more than Stanton to be competitive. Right field is one of the easiest positions to fill through free agency.

                • Kyle

                  Stanton’s position is “guy who will probably hit 65 home runs someday.” That’s pretty hard to fill.

                  • ssckelley

                    Nice, I remember the Cubs had a player in right field that used to hit 60+ home runs per season. How many NL Pennants or World Series did they win with him?

                    • Tim

                      if bleachernation had a like button I would click it

                    • Kyle

                      And right after he stopped hitting 60 HRs, we had the No. 1 rated farm system in all of baseball. How many NL pennants or World Series titles did that get them?

                    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

                      Are you trying to argue that very good hitting right fielders are bad for a team’s chance of having success?

                      If so, I’ve got about 130 years of baseball history that need explaining.

                      No one player makes a team, and no one player (usually) can sink it. That said, when a team has a chance to grab extremely elite talent, a team should pursue that chance. There are maybe three guys in baseball with a bat comparable to Stanton. If he’s on the market, the Cubs have to be in serious pursuit of him.

            • JCubsfan79

              I’m sorry, are you saying that we shouldn’t go after a superstar that’s not even in his prime, could hit 9000 HR’s with the Cubs, because were giving up prospects who haven’t even reached AA yet. Stanton is a guy that we want Baez and Soler to become.

              I’m for the blank check option.

      • Chase S.

        This is where I have to agree with you, Kyle. I’m ok with veering off the plan a bit to nab someone like Stanton for a couple of top prospects. But ONLY if it takes just a couple of those top prospects. Selling away Castro and 2 of the top 3 is a bit much but I’m perfectly ok with two of Baez, Soler and Almora and maybe another top 15 or two (which is perfectly reasonable considering today’s deal).

        • Chase S.

          But I’m sure it will take a lot more considering everyone else will want him as well.

        • ssckelley

          Marlins are dumping salary at this point, they would want our prospects for Stanton not Castro. My best offer would be a top 10 prospects, a top 20, and then a fringe. No way would I give up the Cubs top 3 prospects.

          • Kyle

            Nobody, and I mean nobody, anywhere in all of baseball, wants our prospects less than they want Starlin Castro.

            • Kyle

              Derp. I tried to lay it on a little thick and outthought myself. That should be “more” not “less.”

              • Spencer

                I just spent the last three minutes trying to figure out what you meant haha.

              • ssckelley

                With almost all of the other teams in baseball I would agree, but the Marlins just shed a bunch of back loaded contracts they are not going to be very interested in taking on another one.

                Besides, the Marlins just picked up 2 young shortstops from the Blue Jays. Any discussions the Marlins would have with the Cubs for Stanton would be for prospects. The only players the Marlins may want on the roster would be someone cheap like LaHair, Lake, or Vitters. But you would still have to bundle prospects.

            • Chase S.

              I’m assuming you meant *more* than they want Castro but yes I agree. If he’s included, though, I don’t think I would considering a SS like Castro is harder to come by than an OF like Stanton. Obviously it isn’t as black and white as that considering Stanton’s age and deal but I’d give up just about anything other than Rizzo and Castro and maybe Shark as long as they won’t be giving away everything they just worked (or not worked, either way you look at it) to get (i.e. all of their top 3).

              • Spencer

                ssckelley makes an interesting point though. Stanton is still under control of the Marlins for cheap. I doubt they’d trade him. But if they do, would they really want MLB ready guys with long term contracts like Castro? Or would they want 4-5 minor leaguers that they don’t have to pay much to?

              • Kyle

                If they wanted Castro and Rizzo, I’d do it without flinching.

                Age 22 season, fWAR/162 (normalized to smooth out for injuries)

                Stanton: 7.2
                Pujols: 6.2
                Bonds: 6.0
                A-Rod: 5.3

                I seriously don’t think people get how awesome of a hitter he is for his age. If he were still eligible for prospects lists, he’d be listed at 1-15 and Baez would have to start the rest at No. 16.

                He’s *younger* than Brett Jackson, Matt Szczur and Josh Vitters, for Wrigley’s sake.

                • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

                  I’d do Castro and Rizzo, but I’ll be honest. I’d flinch. If he blew out his knee in his first season with the Cubs… anyway.

                  I’d flinch. But I’d do the deal.

                  But I’d rather see him in a lineup with Castro and Rizzo. And maybe Almora one day (since Almora can’t be dealt yet).

                  • Tim

                    you would trade starlin castro and Anthony Rizzo for mike Stanton..? Castro and Rizzo are both gunna be locked up for 6-7 years together on 2 fairly cheap prospects. Stanton is going to break the bank.

                  • Dr. Percival Cox

                    The problem with this entire conversation is that it’s happening in a vacuum. if Stanton were actually on the market the Rangers would be on the phone immediately offering Profar, Olt, and Buckel for him, and the Cubs could counter with Rizzo, Castro, and Samardzija and it still wouldn’t matter.

                    There’s simply no way this is happening.

                    But, hopefully, when we have a minor league system to rival the Rangers in a couple years we can be the big bully in these situations.

                    • Kyle

                      Agreed. He’s not being traded, and if he is, someone would outbid the Cubs.

                      The point wasn’t “What’s a realistic Stanton trade scenario?”

                      The point was, “If Stanton was available, how many of our things would it be worth it to give up?” And the answer is “all the things.”

                      It’d be like in 2003 if someone had asked what it would take to trade for Pujols and some of our fans were saying, “He’s a nice player, but we can’t give them all three of Hee Seop Choi, Bobby Hill *and* Bobby Brownlie. That’s our whole future!”

                  • hansman1982

                    I’d do Rizzo long before Castro. While neither of those guys will be able to put up Stanton numbers, I just don’t think you want to deal a 22-23 year old top of the league SS. Same “expected progression” for Castro has him as a 20 plus HR threat with tremendous range/GG caliber defense (a good deal of projection there). That is tough to find.

                • ssckelley

                  I would do this deal in a heartbeat, Cubs have a couple of good shortstop prospects coming up and 1st base is easy to fill. But as I’ve said the Marlins are shedding payroll and they just got 2 young shortstops from the Blue Jays.

                  • Ted

                    But would you do it if Rizzo and Castro were still on the farm…

                  • Kyle

                    Yeah, OK, I’m getting it now. Your entire criteria is apparently “is the player a prospect?” How good they are at baseball is irrelevant.

                    • ssckelley

                      Nope, I am looking at all the other holes the Cubs have. Getting rid of Castro does not hurt due to what they have coming up and getting a 1st baseman is easy. Worst case you plug LaHair back at first.

                    • JCubsfan79

                      Apparently it is. I’d do Castro and Rizzo for Stanton and not flich at all. Seriously, he is that good of a hitter.

    • Dumpgobbler

      Stanton is 22. If he was 31 i’d agree. But hes been wildly success at 22. Baez and Almora are nice prospects, but they are still prospects. I agree you dont want to give up your top guys at a moments notice, but Stanton is one of the few that are worth it. Its all moot because I highly doubt Stanton is available, but its fun to talk about.

    • Matty Ice

      If Stanton played half his games at Wrigley he’d he would have a legitimate shot at 60 bombs

  • Rizzofanclub

    This trade shocks me b/c I would of thought the Dodgers would of done this trade to stock their triple A team.

  • Chicago Taxpayer

    Well this Trade does not make Bud Selig Happy at all………..because the bigger picture of this trade is Every Politician here in Chicago and Every Politician in the California and Florida Bay area’s are paying attention and This situation makes just that much harder to get Public Funding for the Cubs,Rays and A’s…………This is a situation where I have to thank Loria for showing us the pure corruptness……..Trust me these Politicians are watching and they are gonna have closed ears when the MLB comes calling…….Hopefully this stops all this taxpayer dollars funding stadiums………..The MLB made 7.8 Billion last year and they can afford to pay for their own stadiums…….But with Castro the cubs lost Games……….They should deffinately trade him for stanton and take there chances………if the marlins are willing to do it………

    • Tim

      Stantons WAR was 5.8 (career year) in 123 games. Castros was 3.3 (consistent) in 162 games. Is it really worth to win max 3 extra games with a player going to be making atleast 10 million a year more?

      • Kyle

        Yes. Yes. A million times yes. $10 million to get three extra wins is a fantastic bargain.

        • Tim

          I suppose im just biased towards castro and Rizzo having success in Chicago. But I guess the same argument goes for Miami

  • http://n/a jtcubsfan44

    Castro would not be in deal.. too expensive and they just acquired two shortstops. Giving up all of our top prospects for one player, coming off a 100 loss season, in the middle of a rebuild, with no pitching prospects whatsoever, seems like a terrible idea to me.

    Don’t get me wrong, I would buy a Giancarlo Cubs jersey the minute a trade was “imminent,” but at this point it doesn’t make sense for the price.

    A lot of people on here act like Theo doesn’t have a plan. Rebuilding a farm system is a long process. We’re in a heck of a lot better spot than we were last year, it just takes time. Whats the difference between 101 losses and 85 losses at this point?

  • Chicago Taxpayer

    @jtcubsfan44…………You do not have to lose to rebuild your team,thats a cop out by Theo and Ricketts………….Teams have showed you can do both by making good deals………..The Blue Jays just shot to the top of the AL East in 1 night……..

    • Chase S.

      Looks like 1967 changed his name…

      • college_of_coaches

        What…….gave it………away…….?

    • http://n/a jtcubsfan44

      The top of the AL East? They are not the top of the AL East. The Rays have one of the best staffs in the league, the Yankees win 95 games a year, and now the Orioles look to hang around. I would not consider them the top of the AL East, but they may make the playoffs as a wildcard. Thats besides the point. They’ve had a top farm system for a little while, so they’re where we want to be in a year or two. Who are our top prospects when we trade Baez, Soler, Almora? I don’t really know, not anyone that I’m going to get my hopes up for. We were bad before we started the rebuild. So why not trade our decent players for prospects and give some youngers guys a chance to see what they can do. The goal is sustained success, with cost controlled young players, then add free agents/high priced talent.

Bleacher Nation Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Bleacher Nation is a private media site, and it is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago Cubs. Neither MLB nor the Chicago Cubs have endorsed, supported, directed, or participated in the creation of the content at this site, or in the creation of the site itself. It's just a media site that happens to cover the Chicago Cubs.

Bleacher Nation is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

Google+