36 replies to this topic

[Crockett]

Okay, there are a few things to comment on here, so i'll number them.



3) To Petrowsky: Please state again which two prospects you'd rather have than Shelby Miller? If it's Smyly/Crosby, you need some reasoning to back that up, because even with Miller's stock being down a bit, you might be the only person on the planet who would have that preference.

I don't need to restate it because it's in the text in this very thread. You do not have a crystal ball nor does anybody on this planet. No one knows what Shelby Miller will become. Yes, he was ranked extremely high as a prospect last year. That doesn't mean he will become a stud starter. With the position the Cubs are in they need to stockpile pitching prospects to gaurantee that a few will pan out and reach their potential. I would rather receive two prospects with upside than one guy who may or may not be a stud. The last pitcher in the Cardinals system to win pitcher of the year two years running was Rick Ankiel. Anything can happen. With the state of the Cubs' system they need to get as many guys with potential, and not just trade away assests for one guy who has stud stuff. If the Cubs had a couple of prospects who were close to contributing at the major league level then you absolutely make the deal for a guy like Miller. If he doesn't pan out then you still have some other guys to fall back on. The Cubs do not have this luxury. You can have your own opinion. Your ideas could be more succesful than mine or vice versa. Neither of us are FO personnel for a reason.

But your view is quantity vs. quality, or at least that's what it seems. Is that your view?

PS - I totally missed the fact that you're the one who started this thread. My apologies for not connecting those dots.

[Petrowsky]

"But your view is quantity vs. quality, or at least that's what it seems. Is that your view?"

In a system that lacks both quantity and quality, yes that is my view if you are adding a combination of both. The Cubs have no starters that look like they could contribute any time soon. McNutt is looking like a bullpen arm, the same could be said of Maples. The Cubs need starting arms in their system. Both Crosby and Flynn would easily become the Cubs' top starting pitching prospects. Yes, Miller would easily become the best starter prospect in the Cubs system. However, I would rather take those two prospects from the Tigers plus what the Cubs get for Garza. If the Cubs swing Garza for another prospect starter with potential, a decent 3b prospect, and some other prospect I would feel better abpout the Cubs' system. Miller is a great prospect. There is no doubt about that, yet I would feel better about the Cubs' chances of having one of Crosby and Flynn turn into a #3 type starter. Trading Dempster straight up for Miller is just as much as a crapshoot than trading Dempster for two #3 type starters. Like I said, if the Cubs had some prospective starters in their system that were close to breaking into the bigs than I would go for Miller. Adding Miller, who is a gamble however you slice it, with him not panning out then the Cubs traded a commodity without any type of return. This is the chance you take when you have some prospects who are close. The Cubs do not have any prospects who are close to starting for the Cubs. You have to add quality and quanity to improve your chances of adding contributors to the major league level. Adding just quality could work out great or leave the Cubs empty handed because they traded away all of their assets with no return. Granted, this could happen with my proposed trade, but adding both quantity and quality improves those chances in my mind. Look at this year's draft. The Cubs obviously added more pitching prospects than anything to improve their chances of finding a contributor. These additions are years away from contributing. Adding Crosby and Flynn give the Cubs two guys who are closer to the show while the youner guys develop. Theo and Hoyer won't last if we have to wait until 2016. That is my opinion.

[Crockett]

I think my main issue with your opinion/points is that Flynn and Crosby have much lower ceilings and have achieved significantly less while both being older than Miller. They've also achieved less while being at lower levels.

There is no reason or indication at this point to think there is even a chance that Flynn/Crosby could become #3 starters based on their minor league numbers. Miller has done significantly more at a younger age.

All of this is moot anyway, because I do not see a scenario where Dempster ends up in St. Louis...let alone for Miller.

[Cubsin]

Shelby Miller is the classic million dollar arm - ten cent head pitcher. He was suspended by the Cardinals for a while last year for being involved in a bar fight, even though he was underaged at the time. And he hasn;t been mediocre this year - he's been downright bad.

[Luke]

Sickels is pretty decent as prospect analysts go. He's in the same ballpark as Jonathan Mayo, I think. Goldstein is a very clear cut above the rest of that pack and provides a lot of free info on Twitter. He also does a lot of free podcasts, radio apperances, etc., and usually links them through Twitter.

Quantity is exactly what the Cubs have when it comes to potential No 4/5 starters. They really don't need any more right now. The lack of quantity is in the high quality potential No 1 and No 2 guys. That's what the farm system is lacking, not pitching in general.

From what I can tell, Crosby has the raw pitches to become a No 2/3 guy, but so far he's lacked the control. Detroit does have a bad habit of rushing their young pitchers, though, so with more time and more coaching in the minors he could clear that up. I'm not sure the Cubs would want to take a project pitcher as the clear best piece in a Dempster trade.

Flynn is nothing special. Guys like him can be found on any team in the Cubs' farm system. He's a decent looking back of the rotation guy, but that's about it.

In the Cubs' farm system today, I don't think I'd have Crosby in the Top 10, nor do I think he would be one of the five best pitching prospects in the system. Flynn might crack the Top 30.

That said, if the Tigers offered Crosby and Oliver for Dempster, I might do it. If one of those two will start throwing consistent strikes, that'd be a good deal. And with two of them, odds are better that one of them would. It would depend on what the other offers looked like, though. If I could get two pitchers out of the Toronto farm system instead, Detroit would have no shot.

[Crockett]

Sickels is pretty decent as prospect analysts go. He's in the same ballpark as Jonathan Mayo, I think. Goldstein is a very clear cut above the rest of that pack and provides a lot of free info on Twitter. He also does a lot of free podcasts, radio apperances, etc., and usually links them through Twitter.

Quantity is exactly what the Cubs have when it comes to potential No 4/5 starters. They really don't need any more right now. The lack of quantity is in the high quality potential No 1 and No 2 guys. That's what the farm system is lacking, not pitching in general.

From what I can tell, Crosby has the raw pitches to become a No 2/3 guy, but so far he's lacked the control. Detroit does have a bad habit of rushing their young pitchers, though, so with more time and more coaching in the minors he could clear that up. I'm not sure the Cubs would want to take a project pitcher as the clear best piece in a Dempster trade.

Flynn is nothing special. Guys like him can be found on any team in the Cubs' farm system. He's a decent looking back of the rotation guy, but that's about it.

In the Cubs' farm system today, I don't think I'd have Crosby in the Top 10, nor do I think he would be one of the five best pitching prospects in the system. Flynn might crack the Top 30.

That said, if the Tigers offered Crosby and Oliver for Dempster, I might do it. If one of those two will start throwing consistent strikes, that'd be a good deal. And with two of them, odds are better that one of them would. It would depend on what the other offers looked like, though. If I could get two pitchers out of the Toronto farm system instead, Detroit would have no shot.

Well stated. Although, my friend who lives in Toronto and is a diehard fan states that if Anthopolous starts breaking down the farm for guys like Dempster/Garza (versus bigger/better), there might be a Canadian riot situation.

[Petrowsky]

That said, if the Tigers offered Crosby and Oliver for Dempster, I might do it. If one of those two will start throwing consistent strikes, that'd be a good deal. And with two of them, odds are better that one of them would. It would depend on what the other offers looked like, though. If I could get two pitchers out of the Toronto farm system instead, Detroit would have no shot.

This paragraph is exactly the point I was/am trying to make. Every organization needs stud starting pitching prospects, including the Cubs. My point is the Cubs need a combination of quantity and quality. The Cubs system might have quantity but with little quality. Adding a pitcher like Miller(Could be a single other stud pitching prospect as well) just adds one quality arm while giving up a big trade asset in Dempster. What if this single pitching prospect fails? Then the Cubs put all of their eggs into one basket and gave up one proven asset for one prospect that didn't pan out.

My point is that when you have a better than average minor league system in terms of starting pitching then you can afford to put all of your eggs into one basket because you have a few other back up plans. The Cubs don't necessarily need to get Crosby and Flynn. I was just trying to be reasonable in terms of a package the Cubs could get in return. I would rather the Cubs get two starter prospects with better than average rankings as opposed to one with high rankings. I feel like your chances are better of having one of the two pan out over just the one prospect. If a prospect like Miller was having a good season and was close to being called up then I think I would be more in line with the idea of just getting the one prospect.

[Petrowsky]

PS - I totally missed the fact that you're the one who started this thread. My apologies for not connecting those dots.

Don't worry about it man. I came to this board because the Cubs.com message board is a little childish at times. I like to talk baseball. I am sorry if I come off defensive. I guess that is what that board has groomed me to expect. Whatever Theo and Hoyer decide to do I will support until they are proven wrong. Theoyer have made the right deals so far with Marshall/Wood, Rizzo/Cashner, but seemed to lose on the Stewart/Colvin trade(I understand Colvin was partially blocked and not much of a Theo guy in terms of numbers).

So far he has shown he has an eye for talent. These trades could still go anyway so saying that Theo is the victor in .667% of his trades at this point is still very premature. However, the Cubs FO still understands prospects better than you or I as well as Law or anyone of his kind. We can argue these facts until we are both blue in the face. Unless, of course, there were two alternate universes where my trades could go down as well as yours and see who would be right in the end haha.

[Brett]

This is a pretty swell thread. Just thought I'd say.

[Mr. Gonzo]

There are tons of prognosticators in the regular comments section, and some of them -- including myself -- may have inflated expectations for what we will get in the anticipated Dempster and Garza trade packages. Can anyone provide a decent idea of what we can expect for Dempster? Obviously D. Bundy is out of reach, but what about Matt Barnes? I realize there could be other pieces in place to "up" the return, but what is Dempster himself worth if he were traded this week?

[Brett]

Barnes would be an extraordinary return, which is usually my baseline for saying a guy is too much.

[Luke]

This market is hard to gauge.

For Dempster, I think the Cubs should be able to land one guy who falls somewhere in the 50-100 range on the league wide rankings, plus a another quality prospect... low end of top ten in an average organization type.

For Garza, I think the should be able land two out of the Top 100, plus a third guy who would be somewhere in the lower end of the Top 20 in an average organization.

But that doesn't mean that's what the deals will look like. The Cubs may not get a Top 100 for Dempster, but instead get three organizational Top 10s. Or maybe they get a league Top 5 for Garza, and not much else. Those are estimates of valuations, and that's not quite the same as a prediction of the package.

And I could be way off. The Lee trade netted Houston a much better return than I anticipated. Add in the market factor of having so many teams pursuing the Cubs pitchers, and the stage is set for something really strange to happen.

So long as the Cubs don't get greedy, I think they should do very well. To quote Jim Cramer: "Bull make money; Bears make money; Hogs get slaughtered."

[Cubs217]

Ive been debating a Dempster trade with a few of my friends. If im the FO, I pull the trigger on a trade as soon as possible, what more does Demp have to prove? having him go out for another start neither increases or decreases his value, but does allow for a risk of injury. Additionally, I think ti is possible to influence the return on Garza by using Dempster. Hypothectically, say the Cubs trade Demp to the Red Sox, do you think that would make the Yanks or Jays more likely to pull the trigger on a Garza deal?

[Cubsin]

My predictions: Dempster to LA for Zach Lee. This trade could include LaHair, with another Dodgers prospect coming to the Cubs. Garza to the Tigers for Crosby, Oliver and Rondon(sp?) - the RP who was in the Futures Game..

[Luke]

Hypothectically, say the Cubs trade Demp to the Red Sox, do you think that would make the Yanks or Jays more likely to pull the trigger on a Garza deal?

Possibly, but I see that scenario lining up in the NL East more than the AL. If the Braves are actively pushing for Dempster and the Cubs send him to Washington, the pressure on the Braves to make a counter move could easily go up. And the most readily available counter move is Garza.