2012 Free Agent and Trade Ideas Thread 14.0

[Jeffy25]

please show me this proof you speak of because the one that matters is VALUE.... and at the current price Castro never has to be much over 2.1 WAR to even be worth that contract......... and castro has been over 3 the past two years........ i mean come on

The Castro extension is pretty much fair to both the Cubs and Castro, and for a few reasons.

1. Castro is set for life, and will be eligible for a new big time deal during his peak.
2. It's fair to the Cubs, because they are getting control over him during the years they are likely to be a great team.

This is not a steal for the Cubs, they basically paid him his near market value. Remember, he was going to be a Super 2 and you were going to have to pay him in arb, and you bought out 4 years of free agency at basically market value.


You have to break the deal down into two separate contracts

The arb years

2013-2016
He was due 1.2-2 million in 2013
4-6 in 2014
6-8 in 2015
8-10 in 2016 (assuming he stays on track with current production)

So all together, about 22.5 in arb pay was coming to him regardless over the next 4 years

The Cubs went ahead and controlled those potentially escalating salaries by giving him 23 million for those 4 years.

So fair deal for both parties.

But the Cubs guaranteed that money in order to have control over his free agent years

What Castro would get on the open market is open for speculation, but if he just simply maintained his level of play from the past two seasons (no improvement, no regression) he would probably be worth a 6/70 deal as a late 20's shortstop.

cubs promised him 31 million over 3 years, with the upside of 46 million over 4 years.


Pretty much in line with his overall production. Castro will earn this contract if he simply stays healthy and doesn't regress. But it's also not a total steal for the Cubs, and it won't be without some serious improvement.

Castro isn't likely to turn into a Troy Tulowitzki, but he should be a top 5 shortstop moving forward. Which helps make this deal a nice peace of mind for the Cubs.

he also has to stick at shortstop, and I think he can, and Baez will simply get third base when that time comes.

Btw, league market rates should be compared to the position, he is a shortstop, a 3 WAR shortstop does not cost the same as a 3 WAR First Basemen. Going by the assumption that 1 WAR = 5 million on the open market is false. For a shortstop, 1 WAR actually equals about 2.75 million based on the pay the position receives.

Castros needs to average 4 WAR per year to really earn this deal, but fortunately, he is very likely to do that.


It was a fair deal for both sides.


Sorry just jumping in Gaughan.


for the cubs, this was worth it on two fronts. You have a shortstop that is worth something locked up and under team control for 8 seasons. You don't have to worry about that position for almost a decade, and if he regresses, he can likely move to second base without much issue. It also tells the fans the plan. And it was worth it to them because they wanted to buy out a few seasons of free agency.

But it's not a steal unless Castro becomes one of the best shortstops of all time during this deal. I'm not so sure that happens. He isn't a 20 million a year player likely. Maybe he could become one, but I doubt it personally.

[KyleJRM]

Show me a 4-win shortstop on the market available as a free agent for $11 million a year. Go!

[Rynoplasty]

I'm not trying to draw any sort of dichotomy, false or not.

I'm simply reminding people that financial efficiency is but one club in the bag, not the hole you are aiming for.

I think it's more important to a 100-loss team than it is to middling to fringe contending teams. It's very useful to be as efficient as possible in building a respectable roster so you have plenty of flexibility to make that push into a genuine contender.

[ABE32]

I don't get the premise of trying to trade Castro for Upton.

First, the major reason we would even be talking about trading for Upton is so we can add to our core players. Upton fits that mold, but trading Castro for him defeats the overall purpose of the move in the first place. An Upton and Bauer package may offset that because people would consider us adding two core players for one but there is considerable risk with both of those players.

Upton is coming off a down year with concerns about his medical health and his shoulder. Bauer has attitude problems, potential control problems (in his defense he had better control when he went back down to AAA) and a lower avg velocity (92.2 MPH) on his fastball then is was in college. Do we really want to trade our 22 year old SS who has made the all star game twice already and has shown improvement in different aspects of his game each year for two high risk players. Granted both players have significantly high ceilings but there has to be a reason why the D-Backs are shopping two significant players.

Another thing that needs to be factored in is positional value. SS of Castro's caliber are much harder to find then RF's. With Bauer, I'd put both of their positional values at equal but with the attrition rates of top pitchers, I'd give the edge to Castro because he has already solidified himself in the pro's at a premium position.

Plus, I don't understand why people are already writing Baez in at SS. Like Kyle said, he carries significant risk and could flame out. Don't get me wrong, I love Baez and I think he's going to be a special player but there is still risk with him.

Basically, working with a Castro+ for Upton and Bauer framework really doesn't work for me because of the significant risk involved with both players right now. I'd rather build around Castro.

Five Point Plan:
#1. No one is pushing a Upton for Castro deal...but if we were to want Upton they would ask for Castro. FACT
#2. Baez and Buaer ae prospects and could flame out or could turn into Castro and Garza. FACT
#3. I am not knocking anyone for being skeptical of any prospect as they should be.
#4. if we were offered Upton for CASTRO straight up we should entertain it as we have the prospects that should make the move less painful.
#5. I think Kyle is a great CUBS fan although there is not a lot I agree with him on I understand and appreciate his point of view.

[KyleJRM]

I think it's more important to a 100-loss team than it is to middling to fringe contending teams. It's very useful to be as efficient as possible in building a respectable roster so you have plenty of flexibility to make that push into a genuine contender.

That's certainly true, but there are also other factors pushing efficiency down the list of the Cubs' concerns. Playing in the NL means they probably need fewer wins to be a "genuine contender," and the combination of pythagorean underperformance and sub-replacement monstrosities means they are a lot closer than your average 101-loss team.

[ABE32]

Show me a 4-win shortstop on the market available as a free agent for $11 million a year. Go!

Darwin Barney!









JOKE!

[Screwdriver]

Five Point Plan:
#1. No one is pushing a Upton for Castro deal...but if we were to want Upton they would ask for Castro. FACT
#2. Baez and Buaer ae prospects and could flame out or could turn into Castro and Garza. FACT
#3. I am not knocking anyone for being skeptical of any prospect as they should be.
#4. if we were offered Upton for CASTRO straight up we should entertain it as we have the prospects that should make the move less painful.
#5. I think Kyle is a great CUBS fan although there is not a lot I agree with him on I understand and appreciate his point of view.

So, is #5 a fact? Or...

[petrey10]

The Castro extension is pretty much fair to both the Cubs and Castro, and for a few reasons.

1. Castro is set for life, and will be eligible for a new big time deal during his peak.
2. It's fair to the Cubs, because they are getting control over him during the years they are likely to be a great team.

This is not a steal for the Cubs, they basically paid him his near market value. Remember, he was going to be a Super 2 and you were going to have to pay him in arb, and you bought out 4 years of free agency at basically market value.


You have to break the deal down into two separate contracts

The arb years

2013-2016
He was due 1.2-2 million in 2013
4-6 in 2014
6-8 in 2015
8-10 in 2016 (assuming he stays on track with current production)

So all together, about 22.5 in arb pay was coming to him regardless over the next 4 years

The Cubs went ahead and controlled those potentially escalating salaries by giving him 23 million for those 4 years.

So fair deal for both parties.

But the Cubs guaranteed that money in order to have control over his free agent years

What Castro would get on the open market is open for speculation, but if he just simply maintained his level of play from the past two seasons (no improvement, no regression) he would probably be worth a 6/70 deal as a late 20's shortstop.

cubs promised him 31 million over 3 years, with the upside of 46 million over 4 years.


Pretty much in line with his overall production. Castro will earn this contract if he simply stays healthy and doesn't regress. But it's also not a total steal for the Cubs, and it won't be without some serious improvement.

Castro isn't likely to turn into a Troy Tulowitzki, but he should be a top 5 shortstop moving forward. Which helps make this deal a nice peace of mind for the Cubs.

he also has to stick at shortstop, and I think he can, and Baez will simply get third base when that time comes.

Btw, league market rates should be compared to the position, he is a shortstop, a 3 WAR shortstop does not cost the same as a 3 WAR First Basemen. Going by the assumption that 1 WAR = 5 million on the open market is false. For a shortstop, 1 WAR actually equals about 2.75 million based on the pay the position receives.

Castros needs to average 4 WAR per year to really earn this deal, but fortunately, he is very likely to do that.


It was a fair deal for both sides.


Sorry just jumping in Gaughan.


for the cubs, this was worth it on two fronts. You have a shortstop that is worth something locked up and under team control for 8 seasons. You don't have to worry about that position for almost a decade, and if he regresses, he can likely move to second base without much issue. It also tells the fans the plan. And it was worth it to them because they wanted to buy out a few seasons of free agency.

But it's not a steal unless Castro becomes one of the best shortstops of all time during this deal. I'm not so sure that happens. He isn't a 20 million a year player likely. Maybe he could become one, but I doubt it personally.

you better check again... heres fangraphs http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.asp...ge=0&players=0

o ya i did the numbers basically came to 271/60.4=4.66


hmmm pretty close to 5... but yes I agree it varies by position... ur figure of 2.75 is ridiculously low for a starting SS in the MLB.




NEXT!

[ABE32]

So, is #5 a fact? Or...

Open for debate.

[deltaclown]

Not that I see him as a fit, but what do you guys think it would take for some team to land R.A. Dickey? The guy had an elite season and should be able to pitch into his forties.

[KyleJRM]

Darwin Barney!

Not a free agent.

The assertion that SS's are only worth $2.75 million on the free market gets into what I was talking about with false efficiency.

I love the WAR/$ method as much as anybody, but it's really only effective for fairly common, average players. It severely underestimates the value of good players and overestimates the market value of bad (but above replacement) players.

SS's are one of the toughest positions in the game to fill, for a number of reasons, but a big one being that you can't find very many good ones via free agency. They are almost the running backs of the MLB: their primes are young and fleeting, so by the time you notice them, they are already falling off.

The SS's who hit free agency usually aren't very good and the teams who look to fill the position via free agency are settling for not much, so the $/WAR is artificially low. Just because you can get a 1-WAR SS for $3 million doesn't mean you can get a 4-WAR SS for $12 million.

[KyleJRM]

So, is #5 a fact? Or...

Son, I've been arguing with people about the Cubs on the internet since before Jim Hendry put together our last No. 1 farm system.

[petrey10]

Darwin Barney!









JOKE!

now thats the guy I would look at trading... seriously...


why?

1) Value at his highest
2) Can this defense continue? Bc if not DOWN goes his value... even if its adding 2 or 3 more errors... no GG... WAR drops... no good
3)very replaceable whether FA or in house... options are out there
4) package him with a couple prospects to get a nice arm would be ideal! The value for the arm and replacement should be well worth it... if no deals come up ok fine... then we got to try and get him to OBP in the 700s

[petrey10]

Not that I see him as a fit, but what do you guys think it would take for some team to land R.A. Dickey? The guy had an elite season and should be able to pitch into his forties.

love the guy but honestly no way someone gives what the Mets would want for him......

[KyleJRM]

Our in-house options for 2b suck and aren't particularly ready. I hate creating a hole to fill another.