Jump to content





Bleacher Nation is on Facebook, and you should totally "Like" us:
 


Bleacher Nation is also on Twitter, and you should totally follow us:




Upcoming Calendar Events

There are no forthcoming calendar events

Today's birthdays

No members are celebrating a birthday today

Photo

Bowden


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Cubs Dude

Cubs Dude

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 54 posts

Posted 17 May 2012 - 11:35 AM

Hey All, I just wanted to get some feedback on a couple trades of "unwanted" Cubs players. I have to admit I am pretty frustrated with the Byrd trade. I know he looked terrible at the plate, but I honestly don't know how we only got Bowden while paying Byrd's full salary. Bowden looks absolutely horrendous and has a ridiculous release. I think if that was all they could get, hold on to him and wait it out a bit longer.
Obvioulsy, the Volstad for Z trade doesn't look good either but at least that makes some sense.. My point is if the Cubs are paying the salaries, shouldn't the return be better? I know the F.O. is in a tough spot with some of these players, but if someone can explain to me what they were thinking I would appreciate it. I do love Theo and Jed, but just curious on what goes thru their heads on certain stuff.

#2 TWC

TWC

    Hippie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,052 posts
  • Twitter:@thomaswconroy
  • LocationHMB, CA

Posted 17 May 2012 - 02:21 PM

Marlon Byrd through his 13 games w/ the Cubs: .070/.149/.070. He had an OPS+ of negative 37. Even with a change of scenery, Byrd's cumulative line is only up to .200/.237/.209 with an OPS+ of twenty-four! He was worth far, far less than Bowden, no matter how bad Bowden looked yesterday. And losing him allowed Campana to come up. While I'm no big fan of Tony Campana, his line is: .324/.360/.380.

Would Byrd's slash gone up over time? Sure it would have. But at what cost?

#3 hardtop

hardtop

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 128 posts
  • LocationThe Queen City of the Plains

Posted 17 May 2012 - 03:30 PM

Bowden didnt just look bad yesterday. hes only looked mediocre once, the rest, bad. Basically, we got nothing for Byrd, and, though Byrd wasnt worth much, he was worth more than nothing.
If Rizzo turns out to be a perennial all star, all will be forgiven, but right now: Thed is about 1 for 5.

#4 Crockett

Crockett

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 243 posts

Posted 17 May 2012 - 04:08 PM

The point the OP was making is that 5.8m dollars cash should get you something better than Bowden and a D prospect. I agree with this. This was a horrendous trade for the Cubs.

#5 Cubs Dude

Cubs Dude

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 54 posts

Posted 17 May 2012 - 07:27 PM

Crockett, tha is exactly what I was saying. I feel Bowden is pretty much worthless and Byrd (with us paying his salary) has some value.

#6 fromthemitten

fromthemitten

    sleeps in too late to answer the calendar trivia

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,470 posts
  • Twitter:fromthemitten
  • Locationin a van down by the river

Posted 17 May 2012 - 08:25 PM

I think six outings is a little too early to judge a trade

#7 Bails17

Bails17

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts
  • LocationMiddlebury, IN

Posted 18 May 2012 - 07:08 AM

The point the OP was making is that 5.8m dollars cash should get you something better than Bowden and a D prospect. I agree with this. This was a horrendous trade for the Cubs.

The 5.8 mil is irrelevant..Byrd had a horrible year last year and looks even worse so far this year. When you look at these trades you actually have to take the dollars and cents out of the equation at some point. Understand...the BoSox didn't get the money...they got Byrd. Big difference.

#8 Bails17

Bails17

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts
  • LocationMiddlebury, IN

Posted 18 May 2012 - 07:10 AM

Is Byrd worth 5.8 mil this year? Hell no!! He should be making league minimum for the numbers he is making. In fact, if he were a up and comer versus a vet...he wouldn't even be there...he would be in Pawtucket.

#9 Fearbobafett

Fearbobafett

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 07:51 AM

The only bad part of this trade, imo, is that the cubs are now viewed to have to pay the majority of the salary for anyone they trade. Certain guys, yeah i get it, but everyone?

#10 Crockett

Crockett

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 243 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 10:58 AM


The point the OP was making is that 5.8m dollars cash should get you something better than Bowden and a D prospect. I agree with this. This was a horrendous trade for the Cubs.

The 5.8 mil is irrelevant..Byrd had a horrible year last year and looks even worse so far this year. When you look at these trades you actually have to take the dollars and cents out of the equation at some point. Understand...the BoSox didn't get the money...they got Byrd. Big difference.


This makes zero sense. And the dollars and cents are a huge part of the trade equation, ignoring them is just...dumb.

#11 Cubs Dude

Cubs Dude

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 54 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 11:00 AM

Is Byrd worth 5.8 mil this year? Hell no!! He should be making league minimum for the numbers he is making. In fact, if he were a up and comer versus a vet...he wouldn't even be there...he would be in Pawtucket.


I know Byrd sucks and has minimal value and not worth the salary. In my opinion Bowden is worthless. So why not wait to see if Byrd can get back a little bit. The Red Sox have a player that could give them something, and they DFA's Bowden. So they thought he was worthless too. And the Sox pen is a mess, so that says something.

#12 Brett

Brett

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,638 posts
  • Twitter:BleacherNation
  • Facebook:BleacherNation

Posted 18 May 2012 - 12:29 PM



The point the OP was making is that 5.8m dollars cash should get you something better than Bowden and a D prospect. I agree with this. This was a horrendous trade for the Cubs.

The 5.8 mil is irrelevant..Byrd had a horrible year last year and looks even worse so far this year. When you look at these trades you actually have to take the dollars and cents out of the equation at some point. Understand...the BoSox didn't get the money...they got Byrd. Big difference.


This makes zero sense. And the dollars and cents are a huge part of the trade equation, ignoring them is just...dumb.

Not exactly. The $5.8 million was spent, owed by the Cubs. Yes, the Cubs "sent" that money to the Red Sox, but it's not like the Red Sox got a $5.8 million player. The money, in that sense, is irrelevant.

If that were true, the Cubs should expect to get quite a haul for Alfonso Soriano and $20 million, right? After all, they sent $20 million!

#13 Cubs Dude

Cubs Dude

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 54 posts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 12:49 PM




The point the OP was making is that 5.8m dollars cash should get you something better than Bowden and a D prospect. I agree with this. This was a horrendous trade for the Cubs.

The 5.8 mil is irrelevant..Byrd had a horrible year last year and looks even worse so far this year. When you look at these trades you actually have to take the dollars and cents out of the equation at some point. Understand...the BoSox didn't get the money...they got Byrd. Big difference.


This makes zero sense. And the dollars and cents are a huge part of the trade equation, ignoring them is just...dumb.

Not exactly. The $5.8 million was spent, owed by the Cubs. Yes, the Cubs "sent" that money to the Red Sox, but it's not like the Red Sox got a $5.8 million player. The money, in that sense, is irrelevant.

If that were true, the Cubs should expect to get quite a haul for Alfonso Soriano and $20 million, right? After all, they sent $20 million!

You make a good point. I guess the fact they are sending a bunch of money makes it seem worse when we only get a player Bowden's caliber back. But we can get caught up in that. Hopefully Bowden pans out to be at least roster worthy over the next couple years.

#14 FFP

FFP

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 404 posts
  • LocationWorcester County, Massachusetts

Posted 18 May 2012 - 12:59 PM

The 5.8 mil is irrelevant


This is such a hard concept to accept, but it is spot on. Plus I think Bowden has some upside longer term that Byrd doesn't have.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Bleacher Nation is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago National League Ballclub (that's the Cubs).