Lukewarm Stove: Soriano and the Phillies, Stanton, Howell, Upton

stoveWith apologies, no Bullets today – but, in its stead, some rumor-y goodness …

  • Jim Bowden reported on the radio on Friday evening (h/t CCO) that he hears that there is a deal on the table between the Cubs and Phillies involving Alfonso Soriano. He did not mention the details, but said the Phillies are waiting until Michael Bourn signs to pull the trigger. Not necessarily because the Phillies want Bourn, I’m assuming, but instead because they want to see what impact his signing has on the trade market – and, I’m guessing, if the Cubs are involved on Bourn, there’s an additional layer of intertwined-ness between the Cubs, Phillies, Bourn, and Soriano. Bowden offered only that Soriano would play left field for the Phillies and the return to the Cubs would depend on how much of his salary the Cubs ate, which, obviously. Very intriguing stuff, but a huge grain of salt is necessary – the Cubs and Phillies have made sense as Soriano trade partners for some time, but teams explore all kinds of deals. Soriano isn’t the only outfielder on the market, and he isn’t the only option for the Phillies.
  • There remains the issue of whether dealing Soriano is the right move for the Cubs, given their nearer-term moves, but if there’s an opportunity to sell high, the Cubs have to consider it. Of course, if they deal Soriano, they almost certainly have to add another outfielder (something they’re trying to do anyway).
  • You can expect to hear an uptick in Giancarlo Stanton rumors again – the Marlins’ assistant GM just said that, although they aren’t shopping the young slugger, they’re listening to offers. Teams have been pinging the Marlins about Stanton ever since they sold the fort and Stanton expressed his frustration with the team on Twitter a couple months ago. The Cubs would assuredly have oodles of interest in Stanton, but so would every other team in baseball. The Cubs probably wouldn’t have the best package of prospects to land him.
  • JP Howell remains the Nationals’ top relief target, and if they’re offering enough money, it’s hard to see him going, for example, to the Cubs over the Nats. They’re, like, really good.
  • Nick Cafardo says that, if the Red Sox were going to deal prospects Xander Bogaerts and Jackie Bradley, Jr. (each are top 100 types, with Bogaerts probably a top 20), they would have to get “something more impressive” than Justin Upton. I think it’s interesting to see that perspective on Upton’s value, because I’d assume it would absolutely take a package of at least a couple top 100 types (with at least one elite prospect) to land Upton. I recently discussed Upton and the Cubs here.

Brett Taylor is the editor and lead writer at Bleacher Nation, and can also be found as Bleacher Nation on Twitter and on Facebook.

256 responses to “Lukewarm Stove: Soriano and the Phillies, Stanton, Howell, Upton”

  1. Oswego Chris

    Cafardo not showing any bias at all…more significant than Upton…maybe he thinks those two prospects should net the Sawx Stanton…

    I used to kind of like the Red Sox….

    1. MichiganGoat

      He’s trying to set the market for the Cubs having to give Garza and Shark to the BoSox for Theo. Nicky C can never stop believing.

    2. Internet Random

      “I used to kind of like the Red Sox….”

      Same. Funny how things change.

      1. Bacboris

        Why blame the Red Sox? The fact that apparently every hack sports writer in America has set up shop in Boston, isn’t their fault.

    3. Jed

      I did too. Then, you know, last offseason happened…

  2. nkniacc13

    I think there are a lot of ? on Upton through out the league as to his attitude among other things

    1. Alec

      Yes. No one shops a 25 year old superstar when you are not rebuilding unless there is a problem.

  3. Andrewmoore4isi

    Up tons value on the decline and sorta is value on the up climb. Is this real
    Life?

  4. Marc N.

    Cafardo sounds like another expert at overrating prospects.

    I like Howell so I hope the Cubs can land him, but it seems unlikely. I would like to hear them in on Mark Lowe and Matt Lindstrom.

  5. Rizzofanclub

    on mlbtraderumors they quoted a inside source saying the offer would be Upton for Barnes,Jacobs and Xander Bogaerts. Thats 3 top 100 prospects, I don’t see that as overpaying from the sox point of view. I’m sure they would get a good prospect in return with Upton. I see that as the deal to beat if Arizona wants to deal him. Boston has 2 outfielders rated higher than Jacobs in Brentz and Bradley. I just don’t see Arizona wanting 1 of its 2 high ranked prospects being an outfielder with their depth already. Barnes,Jacobs and Bogaerts for Upton and a prospect is fair and should be done for both teams.

    1. abe

      what would be the cubs comparable prospects those 3?

  6. bs7

    If a team actually acquires J. Upton, that organization would have to be pretty confident they had the pieces in place that could straighten Upton out (i.e. keep him motivated). The Red Sox (with newly acquired skipper John Farrell) and Rangers (long time manager Ron Washington and hands-on owner Nolan Ryan) seem to have those pieces in place that could serve Upton well. But then again, I’d think that a guy like Kirk Gibson would be able to keep Upton mentally prepared to play everyday.

    1. Marc N.

      Is Upton’s problem really some huge character issue or did he just have a bad season Where he might have been injured? Why is it these character issues were invisible when he was putting up 6 WAR in 2011?

      I’m also amazed by how easy it is to destroy a person’s character in sports, which is why I ask.

    2. JR

      First off I am pretty sure Upton had a thumb injury all of last year that really bothered him at the plate, yet he was still above average. 2 yrs ago at the age of 22 he was 3rd in the MVP race. Kevin Towers is a complete dipshit, that’s it. Upton probably does have a bit of cocky attitude as he’s been an absolute stud his whole life at baseball and going #1 overall in the draft. But who gives a flying shit. He’s not a psycho like Milton Bradley or anything… Attitude/good clubhouse guy is waaaaay overblown. The Cubs need to trade with the Dbacks early and often with Towers running that team.

      1. Deez

        I’m w/ you JR! It’s not an attitude if you can back it up. Why would anyone trade a locked up stud OF!? If they want to pull the deal, we need to do it. Upton is a proven commodity.

  7. CM

    So, what is the consensus as to the package it would take to get Stanton? I can’t believe it wouldn’t be worth the Cubs top 4-5 prospects to get a 23 year old star. Question is, how much more than that does it take?

    1. JR

      Well I think to get Stanton the offer would have to start with Rizzo and Baez plus more. At that point is it something the Cubs should still consider?

      1. Marcel91

        No. You’re filling one hole just to create a gaping one at another.

      2. Kevin B

        No way the Cubs consider that deal! In addition why would the Diamondbacks want Rizzo, they have Goldschmidt. And no one, not even Boston, is offering a young proven major league potential star talent.

        They want middle IF’s. They would want Lake (not the centerpiece of course) and naturally they would want Baez They probably would want Dillon Maples or a young potential good starter as well. IF the Cubs are going to trade Baez in this deal I certainly hope they can extend Upton since 3 years of Upton, in the Cubs current state, is not worth losing Baez. It would be different if Upton was going to put us over the top but we are not there yet.

        If we are trading Baez I much rather have him part of a package for Stanton!

        1. Jed

          Uh, smart one? This was a senario for a Stanton trade, not Upton

    2. Deez

      I think we can get him w/ a combination of Sczur, Lake, Vitters, Baez, Vogelbach, Whitensack (sp) & Maples.
      If either Castro is thrown in you can probably take away 5 prospects (4 players/1pitcher).
      If Rizzo is thrown in, you can probably take away 4 prospects (3 players/1pitcher).
      I think “if” Stanton is available, you just do the deal & live with the consequences. You’re never going to find a young power hitter like this out on the market “EVER.”

      1. cheryl

        I can see part of these players going for Stanton but this is way too much to offer. But I’d do Rizzo, Maples, Lake and Vitters, The cubs are loaded with prospects at first so it wouldn’t hurt their long-term plans if Rizzo is part of the deal. If Castro is thrown in I’d keep Rizzo. Maybe Castro, Lake and Vitters plus either Maples or Whitensack (sp?). Again the cubs have enough prospects coming up to replace Castro. I’d hate to lose Castro or Rizzo but agree with you about Stanton.

        1. Marcel91

          “loaded with prospects at first base”

          Where on god’s green earth did you get that from? If your trade Rizzo or Castro to get Stanton you now have a gaping hole somewhere else. As much as people like Baez he’s not a sure thing to remain a SS if he continues to grow at the rate he is. That leaves us without a SS, and at 1B Vogelbach is at least 3-4 years away, hes only 19. After him we have no semblance of a 1b prospect so I have no idea what you’re talking about.

          1. cheryl

            The rerm prospects refers to the future, not the present. Vogelback, Shoulders, etc. are years away but are still considered prospects. And did I not mention “long term”? Yes there would be a problem in the present but not long term.

            1. Marcel91

              I’d hardly call Shoulders a prospect and even if he is. 2 1b prospects in A-ball is not close to the definition of “Loaded”……..there’s still a 90% chance neither even gets a cup of coffee at the majors…..Loaded would be the Braves 4 to 5 top pitching prospects all at AA and above, that’s loaded.

              If i’d have said that Kyle would have jumped down my throat by now.

              1. Kyle

                I’m trying to phrase this delicately.

                I try to engage fans who are somewhat approaching the game from the same place I am. If someone just wants to be a different kind of fan, I’m not going to follow them around disagreeing with everything.

      2. CM

        If scenario #1 was truly an option, the Cubs would be insane not to do it.

      3. baldtaxguy

        I would not trade Castro or Rizzo for anyone.

  8. cubsin

    I, for one, am not interested in trading a Top 20 SS, a Top 100 CF, a Top 100 RF and Arodys Vizcaino for a corner outfielder with leg problems.

    1. JR

      Yeah me either. Stanton’s obviously a stud, but he gets banged up/injured a ton already. I don’t see him aging well.

  9. North Side Irish

    I think the problem is that the Cubs don’t have the SP prospects that other teams could offer, so they would have to overwhelm the Marlins with position players. Teams like Tampa, Texas, Seattle, or (sigh) St. Louis would be able to beat the Cubs offer with young pitching.

  10. Frank

    I can’t stress enough that in the Cubs current payroll, there’s no need to move Soriano for salary dumping purposes. As far as I’m concerned, if we move him we should be willing to eat up to 100% of his salary for the optimal player return.

    1. Marcel91

      Frank agree completely. We won’t give up Sori for nothing at this point. But as soon as any team offers something worthwhile he’s good as gone.

    2. baldtaxguy

      I don’t think that has ever been the case this offseason – he will not be moved simply to relieve a portion of salary. His value is as high as it could possibly be, and is a good opportunity to yield a more quality future player.

      1. nkniacc13

        Correct he wont get you anymore than what he could get you right now. If you get a D. Brown (that was rumoured) that was a top 100 prospect a couple years ago why not make the move since its likely the best thing you will get.

    3. Dan W

      Smartest thing I have read on the Soriano trade solutions.

  11. JR

    Isn’t Cafardo the moron that said Castro AND Garza could be going as Theo compensation? I wouldn’t take much stock into that dude..

    1. abe

      ya. I think he wanted that to happen (he is more off a fan than a reporter).

  12. Jbb

    Hendrix and Vizcaino development is the main driver for 2014. Conway, Blackburn, Johnson, Underwood, McNeil all have to show good growth in 2012 in order to impact second half of 2014. Add in the 2013 2nd and 40th draft pick as pitching depth and we will have our core of internal pitching candidates.

    1. nkniacc13

      what about Loux?

    2. Gator19

      Who is Hendrix?

  13. CubsfaninAZ

    Gotta love Cubs fans but WOW on this site is there a bunch of retards, first off I’m here in AZ and I have to tell you Kevin Towers is not an idiot, there is a reason Upton has been seemingly on the trade block for the last 2 years and still HAS YET to be traded! They have to be blown away to trade him! For example I am betting they were asking for both Olt and Andrus from the Rangers, thats being blown away solving 2 big Holes on their roster for 1 player. To me That would make perfect since for both teams, Rangers would have got a young superstar with a reasonable contract for 3 years to replace Hamilton and it wouldve given Olt a chance to play everyday in the Majors instead of being a shining prospect till Beltre is gone.. And they will have to Over pay Andrus to keep him because he is gonna get a ton of cash with the weak SS situation when he hits market, he’ll walk because they have a STUD waiting. And all the Cubs fans screaming for a Garza trade, you are out of your minds.. He is every bit as good as Anibal Sanchez ever was or will be, EXTEND him or else he will cost a ton of money, and from the sound of it over the offseason he has been the biggest advocate for telling free agents to come to Chicago, sounds like a guy really wanting to stay! We need that, Cubs just need another good draft, pick up some more prospects, develop more of the young guys they do have, then sell the farm for David Price and sign him for forever. A rotation of Price, Garza , Jackson, Shark, will make you an instant contender in 2014 no matter who is in the outfield! I am content with this team in 2013, if the kids develop we’ll be just an ace and power hitter behind Rizzo away from contention! I like what Theo and Jed are doing!

    1. Patrick

      Calling people “retards” just makes you sound like an asshole. How about calling them ignorant instead of using a word that’s very offensive to many people.

      1. baldtaxguy

        X 2.

        I stopped reading your post after that 1st sentence, because now I don’t care what you think.

      2. TonyS

        First sentence aside, I agree with the rest of the post. Continued development from our young talent and we could be in a good position to trade for Price next year.

        1. Kyle

          It’s fun to dream about, and it could happen, but it’s a little crazybuckets to be counting on a trade that far in the future (and this isn’t directed specifically at you, just that Price trades seem to be everywhere lately).

          You have to assume that Tampa Bay doesn’t decide to try to extend him, which is probable but not certain.

          Then you have to hope they like your prospects. They could very easily say “We’re not sold on Baez’s makeup” or something that’s that, you’re out. And then you still have to outbid the other teams if they do like your prospects.

    2. JR

      You are about as stupid as Towers if you think he is a good GM. Good luck with that crap, no hit, slow shortstop Dbacks. I have a hard time believing that’s the best return you could have gotten for bauer, it was just a stupid trade… Oh, the Chris Young trade that was a genius move For Oakland. Nice return there Towers.. And if Towers did want to trade a young potential superstar like Upton allowing media leaks that you are wanting to do something with him for the right deal is absolutely idiotic.

      1. nkniacc13

        The Dbax have said that any return for Upton would be atleast a starting SS and a number 1 starter.

        1. Marcel91

          That would take us out of the running right there….case closed

        2. Dfn4765

          I would say that would take out most teams. Good luck the Upton headcase.

    3. Marcel91

      Gotta say I don’t disagree with what you’ve said here….But just be prepared to get flamed for not wanting to overpay for ridiculous trades and actually wanting to develop your own players like every other good team in baseball…..people don’t take too kindly to that around here.

    4. Rizzofanclub

      I really like your thinking and your points. I am big believer in signing Garza to an extension unless we are blown away with an offer. The same goes for Arizona everyone thinks just b/c a player is avail they have to be giving them away. Only thing I don’t like about your comment is calling people “retards” C’mon man your smarter than that and know its not cool.

    5. Internet Random

      “Gotta love Cubs fans but WOW on this site is there a bunch of retards . . . .”

      Some of them can’t even use rudimentary punctuation or subject-verb agreement.

    6. Marc N.

      I’mgoing to go ahead and agree with the idea that Kevin Towers is not an idiot. Guy’s one of the most well respected baseball people in the game, even if he isn’t one of the hot Ivy GM’s of the day he is well respected by that crew. Guy is far from a dummy…He’s done a hell of a job in Arizona and its laughable how trading some cocky kid with some very obvious flaws everyone is willing to ignore because he’s Hansel right now now has gotten him viewed as some kind of imbecile on the Internet.

  14. nkniacc13

    Reasons to trade Garza: Biggest return that you have on the roster. He wants a NTC and this regim doesn’t give out NTC’s.

    1. Marcel91

      I think if he’s looking for Sanchez money, and all indications look like he could easily get that on next years market, then you have to trade him. He loses all his value on a contract like that. If he’ll sign for below market value because he “love taking his kids to school and being home at night” then sign him up.

      1. Andrew

        If he spends the whole year with the cubs, he wont be able to command as much as anibal because he will cost a first round pick. The cubs would be able to offer him more money than any team because they don’t lose a first round pick for resigning them

        1. baldtaxguy

          I don’t think a team like the Yankees or the Red Sox makes this consideration. I would think they would outbid the Cubs.

          1. Andrew

            They definitely make the consideration. It may not ake the difference in signing him, but to say that losing the first round pick means nothing is simply inaccurate. Especially considering that the Yankees are worried about luxury tax, every little bit counts.

          2. Kevin B

            I disagree, the Red Sox and Yankees BOTH make that consideration. In fact one reason the Red Sox have not signed LaRoche is they do not want to give up their SECOND round pick, let alone 3rd round.

            Yankees actually want to CUT payroll by 2014, they are not the free wheeling spenders of the past, they are not going to out bid the Cubs AND surrender the Cubs their first round pick, no way.

            How can you say the Red Sox and Yankees do not consider this. The new rules have been in effect for one year and neither team has surrendered a pick yet.

            1. baldtaxguy

              When it comes to a proven FA starting pitcher, I believe the Red Sox and Yankees would outbid the Cubs for Garza, notwithstanding the loss of a draft pick. Obviously, its a fact that is “considered”, so my poor choice of word, but I doubt it (the loss of a pick) would carry the day for those two teams in a bidding war.

              Adam LaRoche? He is a different baseball player than Matt Garza and not relevant to my comment.

        2. OCCubFan

          For anyone: what do you think is the value of a first-round pick?

          1. Kevin B

            The value of the first round pick first of all would depend on what number pick, obviously the higher the pick in the first round the more valuable but in the new CBO these draft picks are valuable, all of them. Its not just the pick, its the slot value as well. You lose the money out of your draft pool.

            1. nkniacc13

              And because of the draft pool $ and new rules that is why the Cubs when looking at trading Garza will get atleast something better than a 1st rd pick or they will keep him and offer Arb because the can get that first rd pick. Its also why a team may trade for him before ST ends so they have the chance to get that draft pick if they can’t resign him.

    2. Kevin

      The NTC really doesn’t apply to Garza in this scenario. If Garza is extended in 3 years he will be at his 10/5 rights, so the whole NTC is not that big of a sticking point.

  15. Marcel91

    Stanton is injured too much for me. And you have to ask yourself if you blow up the farm to get 1 player, a right fielder no less, did you just set yourself back no matter how good he is?

    Look at the Atlanta-texas trade a while back. Yeah Atlanta got a great player when they traded for Teixiera, but look what they gave up? Andrus, Feliz, Salty, and Matt Harrison + more…..they pretty much set Texas up for years with that trade….

    I don’t want us making the same mistake.

  16. Jbb

    Interesting to see how Loux and Hendrix turn out.

    1. davidalanu

      Hendrix?

      1. wingit

        I was wondering the same thing…Hendrix?

        1. Earl Cunningham

          I think he meant Kyle Hendricks.

          1. wingit

            Thanks – the pitcher we got from the Rangers with Villanueva

  17. nkniacc13

    If the Cubs were to have a trade with the Phillies and D. Brown isn’t a part of it I wonder what the return would be. I also wonder if there are more parts than a 1 and cash for 1 deal. Only time will tell

  18. Mike F

    Stanton is a top young player in the game. Stanton is today and will likely long into the future be a better player than either Castro or Rizzo. I don’t think Miami would want Rizzo. Maybe they would want Castro, maybe not. I could see them wanting to add a young arm.

    Saying Stanton is probably cost prohibitive or taking the position Brett has that Cubs really aren’t in a position to put the best package forward is one thing. Trying to sell the nonsense not wanting is another. Not recognizing the quality of this kind of young player is ignorant. Stanton has a knee issue, big deal its not trading for pitchers who blow out there elbow doesn’t carry risk and the Cubs have a team of ulner issues. Its a whole different medical world and they handle a lot of these issues quite well today.

    1. baldtaxguy

      I would not want Stanton at the cost of either Rizzo or Castro. But I would like Stanton nonetheless.

  19. Petrowsky

    If Hoyer and Theo could somehow pull of a Jesse Biddle for Soriano trade I would be a very happy man.

    1. baldtaxguy

      I like. I hope.

      1. Petrowsky

        Its never going to happen, but maybe the Phillies will have some mental lapse and Hoyer will pick their pockets.

  20. Rizzofanclub

    I would be happy with 6 million a year in salary relief and Dom Brown. I would be ok with watching him in left all year to see if he still has the talent that made him the #4 overall prospect at one point.

    1. Andrew

      Phillies already turned down that deal though. I think the cubs will have to up that offer a tad.

      1. Rizzofanclub

        That was when Cody Ross was still avail and many experts believed they were favored to get him. I doubt a deal gets done but I would be very happy with this deal, its time for everyone to move on past the Soriano era. I am not saying he’s a bad player (he proved everyone wrong on that last year) but I think its time to move on.

      2. baldtaxguy

        I have read “on hold” vs. “turned down.”

  21. Njriv

    If the Cubs get Domonic Brown, along side of Stewart, Rizzo, DeJesus and Shierholtz would the Cubs be considered too left handed? Gee, never thought I’d be saying that. Or does this mean DeJesus will be traded?

    1. Andrew

      Schierholtz i believe will be in a platoon so that will be mitigated a bit. Definitely would like some more capable righties, but that’s the position a lot of the league is in i feel.

    2. Marc

      I think the big question would be, “how do they plan to score?”

      OK, it’s not that bad…so no, there wouldn’t be questions of this team being too left handed.

  22. carlos lopez

    i heard this rumor about cubs and phillies deal for Soriano on twitter last night, some guy called @cubs1611 , twitter went crazy ,i thought he was inventing that rumor ,because nobody ( reporters ) was talking about that, even you Brett, but now that i read it here, he was right. i hope the cubs trade Soriano Asap. Go cubs GO

    1. nkniacc13

      @ Carlos id you happen to see what the cubs may get in return?

  23. Twiz

    Heard from an unnamed source that there has been talks between White Sox, Padres, and Cubs. It would include Josh Vitters, Travis Wood, and Evereth Cabrera going to Sox, Gavin Floyd to the Padres, and Jed Gyroko to Cubs. Don’t know if it’s true, and even if it is I don’t know if it’s just more than talking

    1. AD

      That sounds too good to be true. An infield of Rizzo, Barney, Castro & Gyroko would allow us to trade Baez and or Lake for pitching.

      1. Twiz

        Heard Szcur would be included too. If i was the cubs, i would still do it

        1. AD

          Oh I would do that in a heartbeat. That would be a steal!

          1. nkniacc13

            well that would clear 2 spots on the 40 man which is what the cubs still hae to clear correct?

            1. AD

              I believe that it would open up spots for Jackson and Schierholtz.

      2. nkniacc13

        Still wouldn’t trade Baez at this time

    2. baldtaxguy

      How reliable is your source?

      1. Twiz

        It’s alright, but it’s not a hoax.

    3. nkniacc13

      would cubs get anything else I wonder? I also think Danks’s health would have a bit to do with the CWS making that trade

    4. King Jeff

      I read that rumor a few days ago, but there weren’t that many names attached. Seems like a good deal, giving up Vitters, Wood, and Szczur for Gyorko.

    5. Andrew

      sounds way too good to be true. From the Pads perspective, doesn’t make a lot of sense at all. One year of Gavin Floyd for their top prospect and Cabrera? Szczur doesn’t do much to sweeten that pot either, although he would be a good prospect for san diego since walks, speed and outfield range are more important than power in that ballpark.

      1. Twiz

        for the deal to work, SD would want an extension from floyd

    6. JR

      Wow… If this crazy Gyorko deal is true that would be so awesome. I don’t understand why SD would want Floyd so bad. I always thought he kinda sucked, but it’s amazing what decent starting pitchers gets in trades these days.

    7. Marcel91

      No way that deal happens…..Don’t really thing the padres are that stupid.

      1. Kyle

        That’s a good deal for the Padres. Gyorko is not the elite prospect some people seem to think.

    8. Kevin B

      Wow that would be a great deal for the Cubs! But I do not understand why the Padres would trade Jed Gyroko and only receive Gavin Floyd in return? Makes no sense from the Padres point.

      They need Jed Gyroko so they can trade Headley who is becoming expensive for them. Floyd is a free agent in a year as well I believe? So he is an expensive pitcher they only control for one year, nothing to build on, no upside for the Padres?

      Also if the White Sox could get Jed Gyroko for Floyd straight up I am sure they would do that right now and keep Jed Gyroko.

      Lastly if the Cubs land Jed Gyroko or Headley I see no reason to trade Baez. Baez can play 2B, RF, LF and rumor is even catch (I doubt they do that).

      1. Rcleven

        Floyd made 7M last year with the Sux. With a 2.3 war at about 4M he should be worth somewhere in the 9.3M area. The question wit Floyd is how many innings are you going to get out of him. With the new TV money coming in they can well afford him.Petco would do wonders for Floyd.
        And you are right about Floyd being the only piece. There must be more coming SD’s way.
        As stated above I am not quite sold on Gyroko’s hitting numbers. The PCL is small parks high altitude and would love to see how those numbers translate to the Midwest.

  24. Mike Taylor (no relation)

    The Padres would never bite on that kind of package, giving up Cabrera and Gyorko – only netting Gavin Floyd? They would need more.

    1. Twiz

      Szcur would be going to Pads as well. Some other minor pieces would be included going to and from cubs, pads, and sox

    2. Internet Random

      “bite on that kind of package”

      Let the jokes begin.

      1. Carew

        Hahaha ew. Hooray for immaturity!

        But seriously(ish) i got a giggle

        1. Internet Random

          Let this be a lesson to all you kids about the dangers of mixed metaphors.

    3. Rcleven

      Pretty much think the Pad could extend Floyd at a reasonable cost. Got to agree that Cabrera and Gyorko is a high price to pay. Gyorko is blocked and is a little defensively challenged. Still would like to see how Gyorko’s bat would play in Peoria out of the heat in Vegas.

      1. Kevin B

        You think they could extend Floyd, ok? What is reasonable? He is already at 9.5 million and the market now for his type of pticher is probably 12 million give or take. Is that reasonable? Maybe in this new market but that is still a big chunk of change for the Padres budget.

        Josh Byrnes is a good GM and he is no idiot. He is not making that rumored trade as was stated here. Maybe the trade goes down but if it does the Padres will be getting much more back then Floyd. Maybe some of the players in the rumor going to the White Sox go to the Padres? Who knows. I just do not see Gavin Floyd netting the White Sox those three players. If Hahn can net those three players for Floyd or even Gyrko then he is on his way to being a real fantastic GM.

  25. Mike Taylor (no relation)

    So, we start Gyorko in AAA and deal Ian Stewart at the deadline? Hopefully netting us close to what we gave up for Gyorko? Seems legit.

    TWood – With our recent free agent pitching acquisitions, 6th starter.
    JVitters – Only 22, struggles at the beginning of each new level.
    MSzczur – Lots of speed, but requires taking up a roster spot.

  26. Turn Two

    I heard a rumor from an unnamed source that we were getting 4 #1 picks for steve clevenger. I’ll check with my other sources, deal says we may need to throw in cash.

    1. Marcel91

      LOL good one.

    2. JR

      I heard a rumor for an unnamed source were sending Castro, Baez, Soler, and Rizzo to the Red Sox as Theo compensation. Nevermind, the source was Nick Cafardo, I just remembered…

    3. Kevin B

      hahaaha good one!

  27. Patrick G

    What kind of player is Gyorko? Never heard of him, but just by looking up what he’s done, he’s 24 and still in the minors. Vitters is 23 and already had some ML experience. is it too early to give up on him for another AAA 3B who is older? Although Jed knows the Padres system netting Rizzo

    1. Marcel91

      Gyorko is a top 3b Prospect in the Padres system. The only reason he’s not starting for them is because of Chase Headley(who still has 2 yrs of control left). They we’re considering moving Headley back to LF to get Gyorko in the line-up. He’s pretty good and the Padres have said multiple times they intend to feature a line-up with both Headley and Gyorko with no intentions of trading either…..He’s better than Vitters at this point.

      1. Andrew

        .304/.356/.513 Vitters line at Iowa

        .328/.380/.588 Gyorko’s line at Tucson

        Gyorko also plays better D. He’s not Headley or Stewart at third, but hes still much better than Vitters.

        Also Gyorko has only been in the minors since 2010 whereas vitters has been in the minors since 2007.

        Taken altogether, Gyorko is just the much much better prospect

      2. DocPeterWimsey

        Headley is an interesting wildcard here. The Pads have rebuffed all inquiries for the last 12 months, but they seem to not be working on an extension for him. That just seems contradictory: I can see deciding to build around a guy (especially one who provides good OPS from a hard-to-fill position), but you had darned well better make sure he is there for the building!

        1. Kyle

          The Padres rebuffing all offers is pretty speculative.

          1. DocPeterWimsey

            It’s hardly too speculative: it was pretty widely reported both last winter and again at the trading deadline that numerous teams inquired about Headley. I suppose that the “offers” part is an overstatement: the Pads might simply have nixed things before offers could have been made.

            1. Kyle

              There’s a biiig leap from not finding a fit to assuming the Padres rejected all the offers.

              1. DocPeterWimsey

                Well, for one thing, not finding a fit = rejecting an offer: the Pads rejected what the other team thought was willing to give.

                However, there is a simple probabilistic reason to think that the Pads willingness to part with Headley was low. Let’s say that X is the average probability that they are willing to trade him. (1-X) is the probability that they’ll keep him after any one team enquires. Assuming that X is low, this means that they’ll probably keep him after any one inquiry.

                Supposedly, multiple teams enquired, and that’s what makes it look like X was a pretty low number. Multiplying fractions rapidly produces low numbers, and if M teams asked about Headley, then the probability that he stays a Padres is about (1-X)^M. He stayed a Padre, and the easiest way to do that is if X is really low: i.e., the Pads were not seriously considering any of the offers or simply saying “we are hanging on to Headley.” (If X = 0, then the probability of what we saw actually happening was 1.0: and that makes for a likely explanation!)

                1. Kyle

                  So does that mean that the Cubs were not serious about trading Garza?

                2. Kyle

                  To address your point more specifically, these aren’t discrete events. They are tied in together.

                  MLB teams tend to be very specific in their valuations and desires. If the Padres wanted something very specific for Headley and weren’t budging on it, and only a few teams had it and none of them were willing to give it up, that would make a trade impossible. It’s not multiple iterations of the same chance.

                  1. DocPeterWimsey

                    No, but it doesn’t have to be: in my model, X is an average. Remember, variance on fractions tends to be exponential, anyway: that is, it goes from twice as bad to twice as good just as easily. That variance actually makes the (1-X)^M model lower.

                    However, there are M teams (whatever M is), and thus M chances to find some fit. That means if X (as a single number or with variance) should have been pretty low on average to keep Headley on the Pads.

                    Alternatively, the reports could have been completely erroneous: the media might simply have assumed that this would happen because the Pads usually deal guys like Headley. However, it wasn’t reported that Headley was being shopped, so that does not seem to be the likely motivation for the reports. Moreover, 29 other GMs know the Padres’ tendencies, and it seems improbable that none of the 10 or so GMs who need a good 3Bman didn’t make an inquiry.

                    1. jt

                      You assume there is a variable probability that The Dads would would trade a particular player. I’d guess there would be a 100% chance they would trade if their price was met.
                      The question then becomes what is the probability that another GM would pay that price?
                      It would seem that is an entirely different problem.

            2. Marcel91

              I heard multiple places that the Padres we’re asking for a king’s ransom to get Headley and that’s why talks never got far. Can you blame them? He was 28 having a monster year with 3 years of control left.

              1. Kyle

                That insider that we’ve all been quoting a ton lately said it was the Cubs who turned down Headley for Jackson and McNutt.

                1. DocPeterWimsey

                  *snort* If the Pads had been willing to give up Headley for the likes of Jackson and McNutt, then there are 28 other GMs who would have offered them that or more: even the guys who didn’t need Headley would have turned it into a 3 team trade to get what they wanted from someone else.

                  The snort was literal. I now have beer in my nose. It feels good and bad in a bad and good sort of way.

                  1. DocPeterWimsey

                    Oh, in short: I cannot think much of that insider! Perchance he heard it backwards and the Cubs offered those two. I’d tend to doubt even that: I’d have been so insulted that the Rizzo-Cashner trade would never have come to fruition.

                  2. Kyle

                    You are severely underestimating the trade value those two had at this time last year. Jackson was seen as a ready-to-step-in 6 years of control center fielder. McNutt was still a fireballer who many thought would return to elite prospect status if his blisters had healed up during the offseason.

                    Headley at the time was coming off a career-high .773 OPS in 113 games and hadn’t posted a .400 SLG since 2008.

                    A year later, when the two prospects have seen there value plummet and Headley had a huge breakout season, it seems a lot more absurd. But at the time, I bet many Cubs fans would have snorted at the thought of giving up both of those guys for Headley.

                    1. Marcel91

                      I guess you answered my question by replying to his statement. I’m going to assume it was before the season which makes it extremely understandable why the cubs turned that deal down at the time.

                2. Marcel91

                  Was that before Headley’s big year or during it? Makes a pretty big difference whether it was understandable or not. Back then McNutt was a starter, Headley played LF the year before and never put up huge numbers, and Jackson was one of our top-4 prospects.

    2. Mr. Ashley Chavez

      The dude can flat out rake offensively, not too bad defensively.

    3. Kevin B

      Jed Gyroko is not only the Padres top 3B prospect but one of the top 3B prospects in all of Baseball. Once upon a time so was Josh Vitters ………

      1. nkniacc13

        And once upon a time the Cubs could have had Jake Peavy if they were willing to trade Vitters

        1. Kevin B

          Not exactly ….. Vitters was only one piece of that trade offer for Peavy. They also wanted Sean Marshall and a few others. In hindsight the Cubs did well not to make that deal.

  28. Jolt

    In regards to Justin Upton, please look at his home/road splits and re-evaluate if his numbers are worth giving up elite prospects for.

    In regards to this Pads/White Sox/Cubs rumor, it’s coming from an insider over at Pro Sports Daily named ABTY, as far as I know. I’d pull the trigger on that trade in a heartbeat,

    1. Marcel91

      I sure most of us including the cubs would, San diego on the other hand would have to be stupid to do that.

      1. Rcleven

        Including Cabrera is the only thing stupid in in the trade. Pads have been looking for veteran pitching and could sign Floyd for Danks money. Floyd would play well at SD’s park and getting out of the Cell.

      2. Adventurecizin' Justin

        The question I have is why would the Padres and Sox include the Cubs? I’d think the Sox would prefer to get Gyorko than the rumored package. As a Cubs fan, I’d take it!!

      3. Kyle

        The insider said that the Cubs aren’t sold on Gyokro as a starter, more as a super-utility guy, and that the White Sox wanted either team to take Beckham and neither team wants to.

        1. nkniacc13

          Interesting. That neither wants Beckhand the Cubs who would give up 3 players aren’t sold on Gyokro as a starter

        2. Turn Two

          who is the insider? This trade makes so little sense i was under the assumption it was fabricated by a cub fan.

          1. Kyle

            His name is ABTY. He has a lot of inside-industry contacts and has been very good in the past at providing information that eventually turns out to be true long before the regular media gets wind of it. Things like minor draft pick signings where he knew the exact dollar amount weeks before it became official.

            Basically, he said that the three teams had discussed the framework of a deal that involved Floyd to the Padres, Travis Wood and possibly Vitters to the Sox, and Gyorko to the Cubs, and the Cubs would probably be kicking in at least one more prospect in the Szczur range to the Sox. He said that the Sox also wanted one of the teams to take Beckham, but that the Padres said no because they didn’t want his salary, and the Cubs refused because they just didn’t want Beckham, and that the whole thing was unlikely to be revisited.

            He also said that the Cubs see Gyorko as a 500-PA supersub type who could see time at 2b and the OF, and that they aren’t really sold on his ability to be an everyday starting 3b.

            Gyorko is being *seriously* overrated by Cubs fans. He’s an interesting prospect with a chance to be a Mark DeRosa type, but he’s not a stud by any means.

            1. Turn Two

              Sox would get sczcur vitters and Travis wood for Floyd? Its a ridiculous trade, Floyd got wood alone I’d say is to much.

            2. Marcel91

              Thanks for the good info

            3. Internet Random

              “He also said that the Cubs . . . aren’t really sold on his ability to be an everyday starting 3b.”

              This is what I’d say, too, if I wanted to drive the price down. I’m not saying that’s what’s happening, but I wouldn’t blindly accept that comment at face value.

            4. Andrew

              does this guy have a twitter that he posts these things to or a blog or something? Sounds like a good guy to follow.

              1. Jeff1969

                Gyorko looks like a very good hitting prospect. Was a SS in college & has played 3B & 2B since he was drafted in the 2nd round in 2010. He was pretty amazing at A+ (Cal. League) & AAA (PCL) but struggled at AA (Texas League). As a fielder he’s decent with a slightly above average arm. The main criticism of him is his body type, 5’10 & 190 lbs & according to some, not impressive. I think in this case that’s a load of crap. He can hit, but he may be the best fit at 2B, which lowers his value. He doesn’t have much more than 20 homer potential in the majors. All this being said, I could see the Cubs acquiring him, he’s useful player, but the idea that the White Sox would give up Floyd & possibly for that Cubs/Padres pile is absurd. They have no use for any of three that get mentioned. Vitters? Why? They already have their own disappointing 3B prospect in Morel. Wood? At best he’s a bullpen arm for them that they don’t need. Cabrera? What’s he going to do? There is just nowhere for him. Floyd for Gyorko, might be a possibility, but then the Sox would have to move Beckham or make Keppinger more of a sub than they stated he was going to be. But forget about the White Sox accepting the package of players mentioned. Floyd is way more valuable than Wood. Do some research & you’ll see he’s in Edwin Jackson territory & as far as performance goes, he’s Anibal Sanchez’ equal.

    2. brickhouse

      He also mentioned there were too many ifs for this to happen,

  29. Mike

    1. Trade Soriano for Brown
    2. Trade Garza for a Package of prospects
    3. Trade Dejesus for Best prospect you can get
    4. Trade for Stanton! If you make all the moves above you should be able to find a package to get Stanton that doesn’t involve Beaz, Rizzo, Castro or Soler. Something like Voglebach, prospects from Garza deal, prospect from Dejesus Deal and Vizcaino for Stanton!

    1. Marcel91

      I do it except keep Vizcaino out of it. We already lack young pitching. Stanton at 23 already has bad knees and doesn’t look like a guy that will age well. I’d rather keep all those prospects and if even 2-3 of out of 10 pan out then that will be considered a success over having 1 player.

    2. brickhouse

      Cubs had no interest in Brown

      Garza needs to prove healthy before he is tradeable

      You can’t get Stanton without giving your best prospects and with Miami not shopping him the Cubs would have to overpay to have a chance since they are just listening

    3. Kevin B

      Ok Mike but

      2. “Trade Garza for a Package of prospects” – Well what does that mean? A bunch of names, minor leaguers or actual solid propsects with at least one of them being a top 60 in all of baseball or just a bunch of scrubs? Better of extending Garza.

      3. “Trade Dejesus for Best prospect you can get”. Ok again what does this mean. The Cubs should have extended Ted Lilly years ago instead of dumping him for the best prospect they could get (Blake DeWitt).

  30. Mr. Ashley Chavez

    LF: Brown
    CF: Jackson
    RF: Soler
    3B: Gyorko
    SS: Castro
    2B: Barney
    1B: Rizzo
    C: Castillo
    SP: Price, Garza, Shark, Jackson, Vizciano

    1. Marcel91

      I doubt Barney is the 2b of the future, and where are Almora and Baez. Traded for Prince?

      1. Andrew

        Depends on the year this hypothetical roster is made. If its 2015, I’d say Baez was traded for price and almora is in AAA knocking at the door to move Jackson to left and trade D Brown