NEWSLETTER
Although the rumors of the Cubs and Rockies discussing a Kris Bryant-Nolan Arenado swap were both extremely sexy and surprisingly plausible (a rare combination), I’ve said before that it’s worth getting the perspective out of Colorado to consider how the Rockies might be viewing such a discussion.
We wrote recently about the Rockies’ thinking on trading Arenado, generally, earlier this week, and Patrick Saunders – the beat writer for the Denver Post – got even more specific on a podcast today with Dave Kaplan.
https://twitter.com/NBCSCubs/status/1223603154907844611
Although Saunders did not dismiss the fit in trade with the Cubs, or even necessarily any Rockies interest in Bryant, he did cast doubt on (1) whether a Bryant-for-Arenado swap is on the table at this point, or (2) even if it were, whether the Rockies would do a one-for-one, particularly with the Rockies eating $7 to $8 million annually on Arenado’s deal, as was the original rumor.
Saunders does believe that the Cubs are a team for which Arenado would waive his no-trade clause and accept a trade, and did say that a trade with the Cubs “could certainly happen at some point.” He just doesn’t see it being a straight-up swap for Bryant.
And, to be fair, that always seemed pretty unlikely to work out financially for both teams anyway. The Cubs would clearly need to coordinate much more to make it work, and the Rockies would need to get more “value” to present to the fans if they are sending out Arenado. Saunders didn’t specify what the Rockies would want, but you can fairly presume that they *should* be looking for longer-term, younger talent if they were going to deal Arenado.
Moreover, be it to the Cubs or another team, Saunders doesn’t see an Arenado trade as likely, if at all, until the Trade Deadline. If the Rockies are out of it, then they’ll look to make a move.
That, of course, could prove a very challenging timeline for the Cubs, depending on their own competitiveness level and payroll relative to the luxury tax. If the Cubs have, for example, already moved Bryant by that point and are right at the luxury tax level, adding Arenado at midseason would be a challenge. Moreover, if the Cubs are themselves not super competitive come July, trading for Arenado would be tough (when you’re competing with teams whose offers would contemplate the value he provides in 2020). Also, however much the Cubs might love Arenado, would they – in a situation where they’re not in the race or not close – acquire Arenado and put themselves back over the luxury tax midstream? Even while, for example, selling off other pieces? Obviously there’s an argument there (you can only get the guy when he’s available), but I really have a hard time seeing the Cubs going this far to stay under the luxury tax, and then ditching that plan if it comes at a time when they feel like they aren’t going to win in 2020.
That said, there is one highly unlikely confluence of events involving Arenado where I could conceivably see the Cubs – front office and ownership – deciding to ditch plans to get under the luxury tax this year, and risk having dramatically less flexibility for 2021 and beyond: (1) the Cubs are very competitive in the first half, with pitching looking very strong for the full season; (2) needs emerge on the offensive side where, although things are going well enough to be right there in the race, it’s clear that adding a guy like Arenado to the mix would be huge; and (3) Arenado is wielding his no-trade clause very aggressively to try to steer a trade to the Cubs, specifically, leaving the Rockies with very little leverage and a very favorable price tag for the Cubs.
In that unlikely series of events, you *COULD* see something crazy like the Cubs, having not traded Bryant at all (maybe he’s killing it!), acquiring Arenado on top of Bryant, who would then move to the outfield for the second half. Again, hear me: very unlikely. But it’s the one series of events where I could realistically see the Cubs abandoning their luxury tax plans midstream, so, within the context of Arenado here, I think it’s worth mentioning.
