Quantcast

carlos marmol yesMy keyboard is going to explode, because there’s still another trade to write up after this one.

Today the Cubs and Dodgers finalized the deal that was heavily rumored last night. DFA’d and maligned reliever Carlos Marmol, together with about $210,000 in international pool money, will be sent to the Dodgers for reliever Matt Guerrier, who was himself recently DFA’d by the Dodgers.

I’ll get into Guerrier more soon, but it’s what you’d expect in a deal involving Marmol. The Cubs might try to reclaim some value for him over the next month, and see where things stand on July 31. Guerrier is 34, was ineffective so far this year, but has had success in the recent past. He’s a free agent after the season.

Given that the Cubs are including pool money, I’m going to assume that they’re saving actual money in this Marmol deal. He’s owed $5 million over the rest of the season, while Guerrier is owed about $2.5 million.

  • Rich H

    Maybe Theo meant that it was 50/50 that all the trades would be done by the ALL STAR Break.

    • demz

      that’s exactly what he said, actually.

      • SirCub

        Actually what he said was that it was 50-50 that there would be SOME trades done by the all-star break. I believe Rich put the emphassis on the wrong sylabble.

  • waittilthisyear

    w/e, is my contribution here. bon voyage, Carlos

  • TonyP

    The Cubs acquired two of the Astros’ international bonus pool slots for minor league second baseman Ronald Torreyes, tweets Gordon Wittenmyer of the Chicago Sun-Times.

    • hansman1982

      Holy hell…

    • willis

      Now that is interesting if true. I’m not a Torreyes guy, so I’m ok with this if it helps ink a decent international free agent. What I really think this means…

      Move Alcantara to 2B and Baez will be showing up to AA very soon. Eliminating some of the jam there. And seeing that Daytona gets rained out every freaking day, I’m all about Baez getting moved up so he can actually play and get a taste of AA.

      • nkniacc13

        mlbtr is reporting it

    • RizzoCastro

      Which 2?

  • nkniacc13

    Not surprised that cubs moved a bunch today with IFA day.

  • Smitty

    So does that mean the Dodgers have to pay the rest of the Marmol salary this year if we are sending that Pool money with him?

  • RizzoCastro

    Brett, do the Cubs have to pay the rest of Marmol salary? If so we gave up 210,000 + about 5m for another player DFA? I hope they can flip Matt foe something. YIKES

  • cjdubbya

    Make ALL the trades?

  • Kansas Cubs Fan

    Soooo… Are the Dodgers trying to win this season, or are they throwing in the towel?

    I’m so confused.

  • Patrick

    If the Dodgers took on all or most of Marmol’s salary this is still a win. Guerrier isn’t gonna be great but he’s really just a throw in for this deal. Maybe they can flip him as a side piece elsewhere.

    • When the Music’s Over

      I could really care less if the Cubs save money this year. What are they going to do with it anyhow? Sure as hell isn’t going to get allocated to next year.

  • Freshness21

    With all this early action, Brett is going to end up with nothing to do at the trade deadline but sit back and watch How I Met Your Mother re-runs on WGN and laugh all the way to the proverbial (fundraiser) bank.

  • Chad

    I’m happy to see Torreyes go. Nothing against the kid, but I don’t think he had a spot in the cub’s organization, and if the return gives the cubs the ability to sign more international kids then great.

    • mak

      Disagree. Obviously I don’t know how much the Cubs are getting, but what are the odds that any of the kids they sign turn out to be a better prospect than Torreyes?

  • Timothy Scarbrough

    Theo is trying to break Brett’s keyboard.

  • Pingback: Chicago Cubs Trade Second Base Prospect Ronald Torreyes to Houston Astros for International Bonus Money | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary()

  • nkniacc13

    I wonder if they are done making moves today.

  • JimmyB

    Tim Brown from Yahoo tweeted that Cubs will only be stuck paying $2mill to Marmol. Sweet!!

    • Serious Cubs Fan

      Yes but this deal also caused the cubs to give up. $210,000 in international signing pool money. They gave that up to save a little cash. $210,000 ISP$ > $2mil roster saving

      • TWC

        “$210,000 IFA $ > $2mil roster saving”

        Says who?

        • Timothy Scarbrough

          People who really enjoy buying lottery tickets.

          • Serious Cubs Fan

            I’ll take my chances

          • YourResidentJag

            :)

        • Serious Cubs Fan

          I’d much rather have international signing pool money then a $2mil roster saving

        • http://www.shadowsofwrigley.com T C

          Shouldn’t it be worrisome that the organization finds more value in $2 million in salary relief than the extra player that could be acquired with that $200k in IFA money?

          • caryatid62

            They’ve already got over $5.5 million for IFAs. There’s only so many IFAs you can acquire.

          • TWC

            *If* that’s their argument, it’s not surprising, considering what we know of the state of the organization’s finances.

            But spending that “extra” $200k on one or more 16-year-olds? Meh.

            • Serious Cubs Fan

              2 of the Cubs top targets Jimenez & Moreno aren’t signed yet. 200K in IFA pool could help. that $2mil is nothing. Jimenez apparently waffling in where he wants to play, so that $200k could help sign him or allow the Cubs to sign both Moreno and Jimenez. Every little bit helps. But that $2mil saving is sadly not going to help much. $2mil can buy you an over the hump middle reliever like Shawn Camp. Who would you rather have? A lottery ticket kid who could has showed a ton of promise who could potentially be a great player or that $2mil saving that can by you a player like shawn Camp?

              • TWC

                Oh, so it’s $200k in 16-year-olds or it’s $2m for Shawn Camp? Gee, I had no idea it was binary choice day.

                I’ll tell you what: I’m feeling charitable. I’m gonna spare you the embarrassment of listing about 200 MLB players that I could have for that $2m who will blow away the WAR gained from 99.94% of the IFA kids.

    • ssckelley

      Marmol was due to make 9.8 million this season and Guerrier was making 4.75 million, that means the Cubs shaved about 5 million from the payroll right?

      • JJ

        Season is half over, so if they swapped contracts the Cubs saved $2.5 million in salary payments for $210,000 in pool money.

  • Serious Cubs Fan

    Ok the Marmol trade makes no sense. Just release Marmol. Why are we giving up signing pool money!!?! Guerreri is not worth $210,000 in signing pool. He’s 34yrs old with only 3 months to go. If the cubs gave signing pool money just to save a little money then shame on them. Guerreri has abolutely no value to us but that signing pool money did. I would have rather have eaten that money and released him, then have given up signing bonus money

    • Jim L

      They saved actual money by giving up a little intl cap space. Maybe that actual savings can be added to the Miguel Gonzalez signing fund.

      • http://www.shadowsofwrigley.com T C

        $3mil extra to spend isn’t going to effect shit when it comes to Gonzalez, who, by all reports, is getting $60+ million

      • Serious Cubs Fan

        Dodgers are going to make Miguel Gonzalez a very rich man. It sounds like they are going to way outbid everyone. 5yrs at $60mil are the contract rumors. A $2mil saving is mincemeat. Don’t get me wrong I hope we get him but I doubt it and I doubt this $2mil is going make a difference

        • Jim L

          I didn’t say it would make a difference just adds to what they could offer.

  • Timmy

    These are all moves without substance, though there’s no doubt movement is needed at this time. I’d give the set of trades a C/C+ at best. The team will not improve because of the deals.

    • nkniacc13

      No the mlb team not likely to improve with these deals but it allows more talent to get into farm system and all 3 pitchers the cubs got could be moved by the 31st or in the case of the 2 from balt they are under control for 3 more years. All of a sudden the Cubs have a pitching rotation of Shark, Wood, Jackson, Arrietta and Villienueva maybe to start next year if they don’t make another move

      • Timmy

        Yeah it’s not an “F” scenario, and a shakeup is needed. It’s a bit of a push. The question is are they spinning their wheels or do they have something up their sleeve? No evidence of the latter yet.

        • cjdubbya

          There’s also over four weeks until the non-waiver trade deadline. Still PLENTY of time in this ballgame. Excitement-wise, this is a two-run homer in the top of the first, enough to get the crowd into things early but still a hell of a long way to go. Not saying that the trades are home runs, but using the baseball analogy to explain the buzz about them.

        • nkniacc13

          Well the fact that they still have 3 pitchers that have been talked about and 1 of them has control for multiple years that may help in trade market If they fo that route. Plus it allows them the chance to maybe not have to go total milb’s in bullpen and back of rotation now when they move Garza and Gregg.

          • Timmy

            i agree with this, i can be persuaded that this is a C+ for the reasons nkniacc13 says

  • Hack Wilson

    From what Brett says in the last paragraph, the Dodgers probably take on all of Marmol’s salary with the Cubs taking on Guerrier’s. With the IFA money and Guerrier’s salary, the Cubs are saving about $2.3.

    • hansman1982

      If the Dodgers are taking on Marmols contract AND we are giving them the cap space, the Cubs would actually be saving $2.7M in your scenario. They aren’t sending any cash, nor are the receiving any cash, when they trade IFA cap space.

  • Hack Wilson

    Cubs,com reports the Dodgers are assuming on $500,000 of Marmols’ contract. Now this doesn’t make sense for the Cubs.

  • Voice of Reason

    They got rid of Marmol and found someone to eat the salary.
    They got a body thrown in there, but who cares?
    The bottom line here is Marmol is gone and they found someone to help pay the freight for the rest of the year.

  • nkniacc13

    plus if no one wanted him they would have had to pay that salary anyway.

  • Justin

    So this Marmol deal confuses me. I really hope they are planning on spending the saved cash on that Cuban dude that is suppose to be commanding around $60 Million on a 5 yr deal. Can’t think of his name now… Otherwise this is a serious WTF..

    • nkniacc13

      what weren’t you surprised they got anything for him

      • Justin

        Well yeah. I think Marmol is absolutely worthless and has no value. I could give a shit about him. My point is the International Pool money were sending to the Dodgers. That stuff is like Gold to teams who want to spend a lot on prospects. That’s all i am saying..

    • Adam

      I don’t think $500,000 would be the deal breaker on Gonzalez.

      • Justin

        I thought it was a couple million the Cubs were saving on Marmol. If it’s only $500k than I really don’t understand why they would send International money over to L.A. too. I would have rather just ate his full cost and keep the pool money.

  • nkniacc13

    So until Garza gets moved what are we looking at a rotation of Garza, Shark, EJax, Wood and after tonight Villineuva? I think Iowa’s rotation will look interesting now as well could there be moves there to clear a spot or 2?

  • Noah

    My bet would be that the Cubs would stretch Villanueva back out to a starting role, with someone like Chris Rusin getting a start or two here or there before Villanueva is stretched out and after Garza is traded but before Baker is ready.

  • Ralph

    What? According to Muskat (Cubs.com), the Dodgers will pay only $500,000 on the remaining $5 million owed to Marmol??? So, they get Marmol + 4.5 million salary relief + $210,000 Int. slot money in exchange for a 34 year old Matt Gurrier + 1.8 million salary owed to him. In other words, Marmol + 2.7 million + 210,000 for Gurrier. This makes no sense… I have to be looking at something wrong.

    • bbmoney

      Well it was either find some kind of similar deal. Or waive Marmol and pay him 5M to not play for us and let some other team sign him to a minor league deal as he’d be a free agent.

      • Ralph

        Exactly. Slightly better than nothing! When news came out that the Dodgers wanted to work a trade, I hoped for a tiny bet better…. but oh, well, he’s gone.

  • North Side Irish

    Jayson Stark ‏@jaysonst 8m
    Interesting wrinkle to Marmol deal for #Dodgers: If Marmol doesn’t work out, LA releases him & he signs elsewhere they get more $ from #Cubs

    • Timmy

      So we basically have to pay for Marmol and their DFAed player, who we could have gotten for league minimum.

      Am I the only one who’s starting to think what the Boston press kept saying? The emperor has no clothes here…

      Any team with money can sign foreign players, any team with a draft ranking can draft well. What I don’t understand is why he’s letting our young players play with our protection in the lineup, and why they’re wasting time with deals like this that will lose us roster space and money in the end.

      • caryatid62

        The Boston press wasn’t saying that, mostly because it’s not true.

      • JJ

        Not exactly, Cubs were going to pay Marmol $5M for him to pitch somewhere else. That $5M is dead money. Instead, Cubs pay about $4.5M (Guerrier’s remaining salary and a portion of Marmol’s) and $200,000 in international slot pool. Cubs end up with $500,000 of dead money ‘freed’ and Guerrier. If Marmol does not work out, I suspect Cubs will pay $250,000 or so to Dodgers (reducing result to $250,000 of ‘freed’ money + Guerrier). The real way to look at the deal is that the Cubs traded the pool money for Guerrier’s services and $250-$500,000. Either way, the Cubs end up with more than just releasing Marmol.

        • Kyle

          I’m not sure I wouldn’t rather just keep the pool money and not have Guerrier taking up a roster spot.

          • Timmy

            Kyle is right here, why do the Cubs keep making the team worse under the rhetoric that it’s for long term planning? Is the tactic to bomb the team for better draft positions? Will no one simply work with Theo on a good trade? Are the owners restricting progress every step of the way? It looks like this Marmol trade was actually a loss for our future drafts with barely any gain money-wise. Kind of like every trade Theo has done so far.

            The question becomes, has Theo burned every bridge enough that teams deliberately won’t make better trades?

            • caryatid62

              This is Die Hard level trolling. Kudos.

              • Timothy Scarbrough

                He is just a generic troll, I find nothing interesting in his posts.

              • Timmy

                It’s interesting to see how 50% of fans who are unquestioning of any decision that their leaders might make try to tear down those who broach the obvious, whereas the other 50% are on the verge of despair. We could compete soon, but we choose not to. Proejctions are that we’ll compete in 5-7 years when Boston turned around and rebuilt their team into a contender in one winter. The team is in a downward spiral and people are glad that the owners are saving money instead of investing in free agents.

                Y’all have like messed up priorities that have nothing to do with sports on the field.

                • gocatsgo2003

                  I think most people feel free to question and analyze the transactions, but also realize that it’s stupid to think that the front office doesn’t talk to each other.

                  And the plan is clearly for a more sustainable, long-term build than a “flash in the pan” as seemed to be more of the case in Boston.

                • caryatid62

                  Thanks for the contribution, “Timmy.” It’s been noted.

                • DarthHater

                  [img]http://weknowmemes.com/generator/uploads/generated/g1372799587755374959.jpg[/img]

                • BT

                  So out of everything that’s happened today, you choose to dwell on the Marmol trade, and your sweeping conclusion is that Theo is incapable of making “better trades”?

                  This is why you are not taken seriously. It’s not that people are under the sway of the new management. It’s that you are not putting forth a cogent, compelling or interesting argument. You are blowing one facet of one trade completely out of proportion.

                  At best it’s irrationality. At worst, it’s trolling.

                  • Timmy

                    Well when I try to make cogent arguments that cite articles and statistics darthhater posts photos of south park. You all simply respond more often to hyperbole. But the point stands. Management keeps making terrible decisions and the team is awful because of it.

                    • DarthHater

                      [img]http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5483/9196427380_3b87400417_n.jpg[/img]

                    • Timmy

                      Touche

              • bbmoney

                Timmy’s on a roll today. This has no impact on future drafts…….

                The marmol trade is just a big nothing. Save 500k, lose 200+ k in ifa money. Just drop Gurrier if it doesn’t work. Can’t make a big deal about the ifa money if you easily dismiss the money we picked up in the other 2 deals.

                I mean go ahead and dismiss all the ifa transactions today. But don’t make a big deal out of just this one……. The smallest one. Otherwise it’s just cognitive dissonance.

            • Dynastyin2017

              So what would have been a better outcome with Marmol.

              What do you propose we do in the future?

          • Tom A.

            Why ? If they release Guerrier they are still $250K to $500K ahead. What you are saying is that getting $250K to $500K for nothing (since you would rather release Marmol and that means nothing) is a bad thing and that makes no sense at all.

            I seriously think that Guerrier has 30 outings in him for the remainder of the season. Marmol did not have that with the Cubs.

            • nkniacc13

              Plus who knows Guerrier could have trade value at deadline or Aug.

              • Serious Cubs Fan

                Do you really think a guy who just got DFA’d is going to build up his trade value enough in the next 3 weeks to get anything notable in return? No chance. But stranger things have happen *Kevin Gregg trade value cough cough*

                Highly unlikely, Terrible trade, giving up $210,000 in IFA money to just get a shot to save $2mil on Marmols contract

              • Kyle

                That’s true.

                It’s also true of literally anybody we gave that roster spot too.

                The Cubs could sign Brett tomorrow and give him a spot in the bullpen, and he could have trade value by the deadline or August.

            • Kyle

              We gave up a small international pool slot for that privilege.

              If we release Guerrier today, we’d be up ~$500k in real money and down ~$200k in IFA pool. That’s not going to send me to the nearest bridge, but it’s a poor value trade.

              • DocShock

                That IFA pool money is not money, it’s cap space in regards to avoiding penalties. We can still spen $210k we just have to deal with the on sequences of going over our cap space. I get he feeling people think this is actual money changing hands, it is not. The mone comes out of our pocket, the only it does is prevent penalties.

                • Kyle

                  I get that. And preventing the penalties is desirable.

                  • DocShock

                    Sorry did not mean that for you, I understood you knew what was going on. It’s just some seem to think we actually sent IFA money when we did not.

              • Tom A.

                Poor value trade ??? Marmol was not worth a bag of balls and they somehow got $250K to $500K. That actually is a very good trade. At this point in time, I place no value on Marmol — NONE.

                Now if you are trying to compare this trade with the trade we walked away from last year, then I agree this trade is bad relative to a chance to add Haren.

                • Kyle

                  No one’s complaining about trading Marmol. You misunderstood.

                • Justin

                  You guys are arguing about 2 different things. Everyone admits Marmol is worthless as a pitcher, because he is. He has no value, so there’s not point in bringing him up. The argument is would the Cubs be better served to have and extra 250k to 500k of cash or the pool money they traded to the Dodgers? In my opinion they would be better served to have kept the pool money. Now, there are other variables at play too. Maybe another team has interest in Guerrier. Who knows, but on paper now I would have rather they not traded him and paid his entire salary and kept the pool money. So people who say “I can’t believe we got anything for Marmol” don’t know what they are talking about. Because what they got could be worse than just releasing him and paying his entire salary..

                  • Timmy

                    now we’ll be paying his salary if the dodgers release him, another DFAed player’s salary, and we lost the draft money. i think this was a D- move on a C+ day, overall.

          • Alex

            Agreed.

  • Rick

    Do the Dodgers have naked pics of Hoyer. I don’t understand the Marmol deal at all.

    • Timmy

      I bet Theo didn’t understand the deal either. He’s just scrambling to do anything since he’s been on such a bad losing streak with free agents and trades the past 18 months.

      • gocatsgo2003

        Yes. The men in charge of baseball operations have absolutely no idea how the mechanics of a trade they just executed work. You’re absolutely right.

        • Timmy

          Based upon the Cubs record and 33% under projected payroll, I’m starting to think this might actually be the explanation – bad workplace culture from the top down leading to awful decisions that go unchecked.

          • gocatsgo2003

            You’re kidding, right? Like the group of Theo’s hand-picked guys wouldn’t talk to one another?

            • Timmy

              I’m sure they talk to each other but I can’t imagine one baseball guy saying that with a projected 160-180m payroll that we shouldn’t even try to win for half a decade. Something stinks, and it’s probably the owners, and frankly a lot of the fans who have militantly started to insult other Cubs fans for wanting the team to win. A new subculture of losers.

              • gocatsgo2003

                Uh… i) Where is that our projected payroll? and ii) People would like to win, but they also recognize that winning NOW isn’t the top priority.

                • Timmy

                  this i accept. so the question becomes, are we just awful at rebuilding with our current young crop of players?

                  • gocatsgo2003

                    Well, aside from the fact that many of Theo’s low-risk/high-reward flyers are actually turning out pretty well either through their performance or their trade value (Schierholtz, Sweeney, Feldman), the young players assembled by Theo are mostly years away from hitting the majors. Which is by design.

            • TWC

              He’s not kidding, he’s trolling. He’s been doing it pretty aggressively for a while now, and making himself look like a dick in the process.

              • Timmy

                You like calling everyone trolls every other day TWC, but you still need a shave. And you should read my posts. Every single one expresses a desire to win and spend available revenues on players. The team keeps moving further away from winning. That’s it.

                • caryatid62

                  If that’s your only sentiment, then you don’t need to make it every day. Your point has been made and ignored. Thanks for stopping by.

                  • DarthHater

                    And with that sentiment, the internet ceased to exist.

                    • Timmy

                      I take the defensive backlash to a simple restatement of most fundamental of all sports logic that I’m finally getting through to you guys.

                    • Timothy Scarbrough

                      Hah! Getting through to us? You might be getting to some, but no one agrees with your half assed theories presented when you are trolling.

                    • caryatid62

                      No, you’re just being ignored. Happy trolling.

                    • Timmy

                      Tell me what my trolling comment is. And then tell me what my argument is. Or maybe you guys are finally starting to feel like chumps for trusting a billion dollar conglomeration with no interest in sportsmanship to continue the tradition of our parents and grandparents.

                    • Stinky Pete

                      You are right. We never should have trusted and elected this ownership.

                    • Timmy

                      I’m going to declare argumentative victory here over Timothy, Cary, TWC, Darth, and BT. They repeat what the press tells them to repeat, I argue for sports ethics. The end.

                    • Timmy

                      and i’ll also declare unison that in the end we all love the cubs. so this is what they’d call an intramural argument, not a contestable one.

                • YourResidentJag

                  BTW, he’s young but he also likes to refer to everyone as a “kid.” ;)

  • Dustin S

    I was a bit confused on the deal until i did a bit more digging. Marmol is owed ~$4.8M, Guerrier ~$1.8M for the remainder of this season. The Cubs gave up Marmol + $4.3M + $210k pool money, for Guerrier – and the Dodgers are paying his $1.8M salary. The key was that I didn’t realize LA is also paying the remainder of Guerrier’s salary.

    So more simply, the Cubs basically saved $500k plus got Guerrier (with his remaining 2013 salary paid for by LA), for $210k pool money.

    I also don’t blame anyone for saying pay the extra $500k and keep the all-important pool money and LA can keep Guerrier. This is the only move today that I kind of question, unless Theo works his magic and somehow pulls off a late-season flip of Guerrier. It’s not that much pool money though, so I suppose it’s a wash in the end.

  • cRAZYHORSE

    THIS IS A FAIR DEAL. The Cubs needed to release Marmol. The Cubs receive Matt Guerrier, a player that is also having problems getting players out. Win or lose these players needed to be traded. They both have plenty of upside that could be productive to their new teams.I think the Cubs did fine.

  • Dijon

    I would have liked the pool money, but more than anything it is good to get Marmol out of the system. As long as he was associated with the cubs name he would be a distraction for the team. Theo had to give up something in order to get rid of something so ill accept the IFA pool loses.

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+