PDA

View Full Version : Unconfirmed: Marmol Trade Rumors?



dljone01
07-03-2010, 11:24 PM
I noticed the rumor on Twitter all evening. Marmol to the Reds for Chris Heisey. This (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/415138-mlb-trade-rumors-carlos-marmol-to-cincinnati-reds-for-chris-heisey) is the origin for it, I think. I haven't heard anyone else reporting this, so I'm skeptical until it actually does happen.

Of all the pieces to trade... Marmol?! :sigh:

vittersfan
07-03-2010, 11:28 PM
I find this very hard to believe, but the writer seems pretty confident that it is going to happen.

Captain Obvious
07-03-2010, 11:32 PM
For some reason, I think this deal would be amazing. Not just because we'd get this kid, but because we'd be selling high on BOTH Marmolade and Byrd. Looking at this kids minor league stats, he has a relatively low LD% and his OBP has jumped around a lot. But, I say do it!

giventofly
07-03-2010, 11:32 PM
I......like it?

Hockeyras
07-03-2010, 11:34 PM
I love Marmol but I don't always feel safe with him in there...if the kid can be a starting center fielder...I say do it now. :shrug:?

giventofly
07-03-2010, 11:34 PM
I....kind of like it?

1908_Cubs
07-03-2010, 11:34 PM
Sounds like a load of ****, honestly. I'll eat my crow if i'm wrong, but it sounds like ********.

1908_Cubs
07-03-2010, 11:35 PM
I....kind of like it?

Do you kind of like it x2?

giventofly
07-03-2010, 11:37 PM
Do you kind of like it x2?
I kind of like what you just said.

x1

StrandedCub
07-03-2010, 11:45 PM
If this means that they view Cashner as a closer only then I don't think I like it. I'll be mad if they don't even give Cashner a chance in the starting rotation.

giventofly
07-03-2010, 11:48 PM
If this means that they view Cashner as a closer only then I don't think I like it. I'll be mad if they don't even give Cashner a chance in the starting rotation.
It could mean that, but I choose not to let myself believe it.

As of right now, I'm just happy there's some potentially cool news. As of right now, I'm seeing this as "we don't want to pay Marmol or Byrd anymore, and we want this interesting center fielder....and we have lots of bullpen arms in the system".

Yay!

[/unwarranted enthusiasm]?

Captain Obvious
07-03-2010, 11:48 PM
If this means that they view Cashner as a closer only then I don't think I like it. I'll be mad if they don't even give Cashner a chance in the starting rotation.


This trade makes absolutely no sense for the Cubs. Marmol has proven to be a stud closer at a young age - and doesn't hit free agency until 2013. The Cubs have Clovin and Jackson as future outfielders. as soon as 2011. Heisley is the FOURTH best prospect in the REDS system Not in all of baseball. He is going to be 26 in December - not a good age for a rebuilding team looking for young prospects. Should they trade Marmol, which I doubt they will do, they'll shop around and ask for an arm. If this trade happens, I'll eat my foot

from some guy.


Jackson won't be ready until 2012. Soriano's contract will only have two more years on it in 2012... plus his health is a big question mark.

Word around the campfire says the Cubs want Cashner as their future closer for the reason you mentioned... Marmol hits free agency in 2013 and until then will remain a very pricey arbitration guy... much more than the 2.1 he's getting this season.

Thanks for pointing out that I had neglected to mention that the rankings of the prospects mentioned were for the Reds' organization... that is now fixed. Good catch and thanks for reading.

reply from the writer

dljone01
07-03-2010, 11:49 PM
If this means that they view Cashner as a closer only then I don't think I like it. I'll be mad if they don't even give Cashner a chance in the starting rotation.

That's the thing I can't quite figure. If not Marmol, there doesn't seem to be an obvious candidate to turn to in the closer role. Not that the Cubs are lining up save opportunities left and right this year.

giventofly
07-03-2010, 11:50 PM
Goddamnit...

giventofly
07-03-2010, 11:51 PM
Blake Parker :)

toovey107
07-03-2010, 11:58 PM
Trading Marmol makes too much sense for the Cubs to do it. I love Marmol as much as the next guy, but with the year he is having and the contract he is going to demand fairly soon. Selling high on him would be awesome. I think he is the only guy that can actually net a top prospect solely.

Marmol is a top reliever in the game and one of my fav Cubs , but I'm a firm believer in not signing them to any kind of significant contract. To me, it's the most recyclable of any position.

semperfi
07-04-2010, 12:00 AM
Keep Marmol.

jiggin
07-04-2010, 12:06 AM
I am all for trading marmol why the stock is high, but you got to get more than that for him.

Dangle (thats SRGT. to you) him out there and see what you else you can get. I bet as the end of the month gets close you get MUCH better offers than this, especially if you can package in another player to fill another need or a better bench option for the playoffs for a contender.

As far as the cubs future closer...the remaining half of the season should be a nice practice run for a guy or two. FA always has a name or two that could fill in for a year or two ect...

JMO

Captain Obvious
07-04-2010, 12:09 AM
Trading Marmol makes too much sense for the Cubs to do it. I love Marmol as much as the next guy, but with the year he is having and the contract he is going to demand fairly soon. Selling high on him would be awesome. I think he is the only guy that can actually net a top prospect solely.

Marmol is a top reliever in the game and one of my fav Cubs , but I'm a firm believer in not signing them to any kind of significant contract. To me, it's the most recyclable of any position.

This.

Man, if I didn't know any better, I'd say you were cool enough to be my facebook friend.

PunkShizzle
07-04-2010, 12:09 AM
We could get way more for Marmol. So yeah, seems about what we should expect from this front office.

jiggin
07-04-2010, 12:11 AM
We could get way more for Marmol. So yeah, seems about what we should expect from this front office.

???

I thought JH had a pretty decent record of getting good return in trades. Hmmm....

PunkShizzle
07-04-2010, 12:21 AM
???

I thought JH had a pretty decent record of getting good return in trades. Hmmm....


Yeah that comment is really more out of frustration from the current season than any sort of actual evaluation on the last several years.

Kirel
07-04-2010, 12:23 AM
We could get way more for Marmol. So yeah, seems about what we should expect from this front office.
Well, what we're hearing it's not that bat.

Heisey is sorta like Colvin, just more reliable and more likely to hold up in CF. Or more accurately, Heisey is essentially a version of Marlon Byrd who's 6 years younger and much cheaper.

Boxberger is polished and nearing hte majors. He's only so-so as a starter, but could be one, but he has hit 97 relieving in the AFL last year, whereas Joesph is a lefty reliever with a very good slider.

Should the Cubs acquire say Heisey and Boxberger they take a good shot at filling CF and the SU spot for several years.

RedHeadsRule
07-04-2010, 12:32 AM
I know The Bleacher Report was one of those "sources" that I never had any faith in. And unless something has changed recently with that site, I'm not going to belive this.

Guny Highway
07-04-2010, 12:32 AM
Trading Marmol makes too much sense for the Cubs to do it. I love Marmol as much as the next guy, but with the year he is having and the contract he is going to demand fairly soon. Selling high on him would be awesome. I think he is the only guy that can actually net a top prospect solely.

Marmol is a top reliever in the game and one of my fav Cubs , but I'm a firm believer in not signing them to any kind of significant contract. To me, it's the most recyclable of any position.

You mean like Kevin Gregg?
Marmol has the potential to be a Lee Smith type lights out closer. You don't trade those players, you use them to build a team.

Kirel
07-04-2010, 12:33 AM
I know The Bleacher Report was one of those "sources" that I never had any faith in. And unless something has changed recently with that site, I'm not going to belive this.
There is never any reason to believe in a rumor till it happens. Doesn't mean you can't discuss it.

Kirel
07-04-2010, 12:34 AM
You mean like Kevin Gregg?
Marmol has the potential to be a Lee Smith type lights out closer. You don't trade those players, you use them to build a team.
Marmol is going to be making 10 mil+ very soon. And he's inconsistent. And the Cubs have more pen arms kickiing around in the minors than Pinella has career wins. Spending big on relievers is rarely a good idea, and it's certainly not what you build a team around.

JuggernautJ
07-04-2010, 12:35 AM
Heisey kind of Remindes me of dan uggla

Captain Obvious
07-04-2010, 12:36 AM
Marmol is going to be making 10 mil+ very soon. And he's inconsistent. And the Cubs have more pen arms kickiing around in the minors than Pinella has career wins. Spending big on relievers is rarely a good idea, and it's certainly not what you build a team around.

And he's won over 1,800 games and he's not a damn dummy!

toovey107
07-04-2010, 12:41 AM
You mean like Kevin Gregg?
Marmol has the potential to be a Lee Smith type lights out closer. You don't trade those players, you use them to build a team.
As much as I didn't like Gregg, people got on his case a bit too much.

Let me put this in simple terms, you don't build teams around closers. Closers/Relief pitchers in general are the most overrated position in all of baseball. Not to mention the influx that the Cubs seem to turn out.

You do not pay a closer over 10+ million, it's not good business .... people complain about how hamstrung this team is now.

Not to mention his inconsistencies and the possibillities of selling him while his value as at maybe its' highest. Like I said, I love Marmol .. but if you can swing him for a ready position player and then some ... you do it. You can fill in someone through the farm who can do a more than adequate job moving forward.

croce_99
07-04-2010, 12:44 AM
Bleacher Report is not a valid source. Nearly all of their articles are opinionated and not filled with facts. Heck, they don't even name the source of this rumor!

So for those of you browsing this thread, don't believe the rumor until someone who is CREDIBLE creates an article discussing it.

There's a reason those sites are in the filter here at PSD. They're horrible.

Kirel
07-04-2010, 12:48 AM
Bleacher Report is not a valid source. Nearly all of their articles are opinionated and not filled with facts. Heck, they don't even name the source of this rumor!

So for those of you browsing this thread, don't believe the rumor until someone who is CREDIBLE creates an article discussing it.

There's a reason those sites are in the filter here at PSD. They're horrible.
Who ever names their source?

Not that I'm protecting Bleacher Report, I just don't think that's valid criticism.

croce_99
07-04-2010, 12:51 AM
Who ever names their source?

Not that I'm protecting Bleacher Report, I just don't think that's valid criticism.

They're just not a reliable source of information. Again, most of the articles are opinionated.
We don't allow rumors to be posted here when someone says "sources are telling me..." or "I have information that..."

I mean, it's not like the people that run the site are working for an organization! If they have a source, then name it. Don't just say "we're being told by someone that this is going to happen..."

Also, I re-read it and it's not an article from bleacher report. They actually copied it from MLB TR, which is even worse of a site.

So I'm not believing this at all.

I'm not closing the thread because you guys can discuss marmols trade value and all that good stuff.

But for guests viewing this topic, don't believe what you read until someone has a real source

Captain Obvious
07-04-2010, 12:54 AM
They're just not a reliable source of information. Again, most of the articles are opinionated.
We don't allow rumors to be posted here when someone says "sources are telling me..." or "I have information that..."

I mean, it's not like the people that run the site are working for an organization! If they have a source, then name it. Don't just say "we're being told by someone that this is going to happen..."

Also, I re-read it and it's not an article from bleacher report. They actually copied it from MLB TR, which is even worse of a site.

So I'm not believing this at all.

I'm not closing the thread because you guys can discuss marmols trade value and all that good stuff.

But for guests viewing this topic, don't believe what you read until someone has a real source

Where do you see that they copied it from MLB TR? It's not even on MLB TR...

toovey107
07-04-2010, 12:55 AM
Where do you see that they copied it from MLB TR? It's not even on MLB TR...
Yeah I just went there as well.

Regardless, I would love to sell high on Marmol.

Kirel
07-04-2010, 12:57 AM
They're just not a reliable source of information. Again, most of the articles are opinionated.
We don't allow rumors to be posted here when someone says "sources are telling me..." or "I have information that..."

I mean, it's not like the people that run the site are working for an organization! If they have a source, then name it. Don't just say "we're being told by someone that this is going to happen..."

Also, I re-read it and it's not an article from bleacher report. They actually copied it from MLB TR, which is even worse of a site.

So I'm not believing this at all.

I'm not closing the thread because you guys can discuss marmols trade value and all that good stuff.

But for guests viewing this topic, don't believe what you read until someone has a real source
Well, what I mean is even, say, Peter Gammons, doesn't tell you *WHO* his source is. It's just that you chose to believe Gammons and not others.

All that said, I'm expecting to hear an assload of Marmol rumors for almost every contending team in the league. It might end up being the highlight of the season.

croce_99
07-04-2010, 12:58 AM
Where do you see that they copied it from MLB TR? It's not even on MLB TR...

Well the title of their article was "MLB Trade Rumors:"

I assumed that's where they got it from :shrug:

But maybe not....maybe it's another article they wrote to attract users to their site.

But hey, it's working!

Goto Google news and type in "Marmol to the reds" and you'll see a lot of people linking to their site.

Good job by them getting people to their page. Too bad it's likely not true.

croce_99
07-04-2010, 01:00 AM
Well, what I mean is even, say, Peter Gammons, doesn't tell you *WHO* his source is. It's just that you chose to believe Gammons and not others.

All that said, I'm expecting to hear an assload of Marmol rumors for almost every contending team in the league. It might end up being the highlight of the season.

True, but Gammons has also been in the business for 200 years.

These guys are relatively new (bleacher report) so they still have to gain the "respect" (definitely not the right word, but you get the point).

Hey...if I wake up and marmol is traded, then they got my respect

Captain Obvious
07-04-2010, 01:02 AM
True, but Gammons has also been in the business for 200 years.

These guys are relatively new (bleacher report) so they still have to gain the "respect" (definitely not the right word, but you get the point).

Hey...if I wake up and marmol is traded, then they got my respect

I wouldn't give the whole site credit. Because, you could go sign up and start writing and we all don't have any "respect" (definitely the right word) for you. I'd just give that one writer, who is a featured columnist or something like that on there, credit.

croce_99
07-04-2010, 01:05 AM
And why the hell would the Cubs trade Marmol to a team in the NL Central, that they have to face multiple times a year?
Doesn't make sense

toovey107
07-04-2010, 01:11 AM
And why the hell would the Cubs trade Marmol to a team in the NL Central, that they have to face multiple times a year?
Doesn't make sense
Why would the Pirates continue to sell us our soul ? :shrug:


and then continue to kick our *** this year!

it doesn't make sense. :laugh2:

Kirel
07-04-2010, 01:13 AM
And why the hell would the Cubs trade Marmol to a team in the NL Central, that they have to face multiple times a year?
Doesn't make sense
I don't think they'll care where he goes. He's still going to cost a fortune.

Bigger question is if Heisey is the best offer they could get. Practically he may be, but my gut says no, other teams would offer better spoils.

croce_99
07-04-2010, 01:13 AM
Why would the Pirates continue to sell us our soul ? :shrug:


and then continue to kick our *** this year!

it doesn't make sense. :laugh2:

Pirates had to unload due to financial reasons.

This trade makes no sense when it comes to the money. Marmol is making next to nothing. The Reds players are making even less! Cubs obviously have more money in the organization than the Reds.....but the Reds want the player who will be making the most?

zambo4president
07-04-2010, 01:15 AM
**** that ****. Marmol to the team tearing up our division. **** that, it's stupid and doesn't even make sense. Chris Heisey? Who? I agree we should scrap this team and sell high while we can but for Chris Heisey? I call ******** on this one, JH isn't that stupid.

toovey107
07-04-2010, 01:15 AM
I don't think they'll care where he goes. He's still going to cost a fortune.

Bigger question is if Heisey is the best offer they could get. Practically he may be, but my gut says no, other teams would offer better spoils.
Holding off a little closer to the deadline, especially with a possible injury or two happening. Players begin to struggle , another team makes a move etc.

I think you could get a bit more than that offer.

Captain Obvious
07-04-2010, 01:17 AM
Pirates had to unload due to financial reasons.

This trade makes no sense when it comes to the money. Marmol is making next to nothing. The Reds players are making even less! Cubs obviously have more money in the organization than the Reds.....but the Reds want the player who will be making the most?

But it does make sense financially down the line. Marmol has 2 arb years left, so let's say he makes 5 million and 10 million. Next year we aren't likely to compete, so who gives a ****? But, in 2012, they will have like 1/8 or 1/9 of their payroll in 1 player. That limits what else they can do. At least, that's the way I see it.

Just Sayin'

croce_99
07-04-2010, 01:22 AM
But it does make sense financially down the line. Marmol has 2 arb years left, so let's say he makes 5 million and 10 million. Next year we aren't likely to compete, so who gives a ****? But, in 2012, they will have like 1/8 or 1/9 of their payroll in 1 player. That limits what else they can do. At least, that's the way I see it.

Just Sayin'
So are the Reds playing to win it all THIS year and possibly next year? Because there's no way they're going to throw Marmol a huge contract....It'd be ridiculous to spend a large percentage of your payroll on a closer.

Closer role is the most overrated position in the game.

Heck, this trade doesn't make any sense for Cincy

4cubs
07-04-2010, 01:23 AM
On a Marmol side note, why would the Cubs want to rid themselves of Byrd when he is the best overall player on the club?

zambo4president
07-04-2010, 01:24 AM
But it does make sense financially down the line. Marmol has 2 arb years left, so let's say he makes 5 million and 10 million. Next year we aren't likely to compete, so who gives a ****? But, in 2012, they will have like 1/8 or 1/9 of their payroll in 1 player. That limits what else they can do. At least, that's the way I see it.

Just Sayin'

I don't see it your way AT ALL. I highly doubt we would be making moves due to future arbitrational situations

croce_99
07-04-2010, 01:24 AM
On a Marmol side note, why would the Cubs want to rid themselves of Byrd when he is the best overall player on the club?

Apparently his $3 million salary is TOO much :laugh:

toovey107
07-04-2010, 01:26 AM
On a Marmol side note, why would the Cubs want to rid themselves of Byrd when he is the best overall player on the club?
Bc he is on the wrong side of 30 and his value will never be higher?

makes sense to me.

Kirel
07-04-2010, 01:26 AM
On a Marmol side note, why would the Cubs want to rid themselves of Byrd when he is the best overall player on the club?
Because he's 32 and entirely worthless to the team.

"Best player on the team" means squat for a team that isn't all that likely to break .500 next season.

Not to mention he'll be in the way.

Ron!n
07-04-2010, 01:34 AM
Interesting rumor. However, the fact that Bleacher Report is the only one reporting it makes me skeptical that it has any legs. It is interesting though how sure this guy seems that this deal is going down.

I dont know much about Heisey but id like to think Marmol could net us a bit more. Also Croce it does make sense for the Reds. Theyre probably looking for someone to replace Cordero after next year.

ty_smitty21
07-04-2010, 01:50 AM
I have a few comments: first of all, this is from BLEACHER REPORT. I used to write articles for bleacher report... 99.9% of the time, it's people stirring up rumors for fun.

Secondly.... the cubs may have lots of bullpen arms in the minor leagues... but are any of them like Marmol? The Cubs went with a young bullpen this year... then we were forced to get Bob Howry. A young bullpen is usually a bad bullpen.

If the Cubs are going to trade Marmol, they better be daaaaamn sure they are getting a great return.

Kirel
07-04-2010, 01:54 AM
I have a few comments: first of all, this is from BLEACHER REPORT. I used to write articles for bleacher report... 99.9% of the time, it's people stirring up rumors for fun.

Secondly.... the cubs may have lots of bullpen arms in the minor leagues... but are any of them like Marmol? The Cubs went with a young bullpen this year... then we were forced to get Bob Howry. A young bullpen is usually a bad bullpen.

If the Cubs are going to trade Marmol, they better be daaaaamn sure they are getting a great return.
Like Marmol? No.

Better than paying Marmol 10 million a year? Yeah.

captainatheism
07-04-2010, 02:03 AM
I don't see this happening unless we move byrd first.

toovey107
07-04-2010, 02:06 AM
I have a few comments: first of all, this is from BLEACHER REPORT. I used to write articles for bleacher report... 99.9% of the time, it's people stirring up rumors for fun.

Secondly.... the cubs may have lots of bullpen arms in the minor leagues... but are any of them like Marmol? The Cubs went with a young bullpen this year... then we were forced to get Bob Howry. A young bullpen is usually a bad bullpen.

If the Cubs are going to trade Marmol, they better be daaaaamn sure they are getting a great return.
They weren't forced to get anyone , they made a premature rash decision.

it's not like we were in dire need to pick someone up.

People just buy way too much into the whole "experience" thing.

CubsRule08
07-04-2010, 02:19 AM
Im calling BS on this...if we trade Marmol, it shouldnt be for just this guy (who the **** is he anyways?)

WolvesJagsOs
07-04-2010, 02:52 AM
Yeah never heard of this guy.

Captain Obvious
07-04-2010, 03:01 AM
Yeah never heard of this guy.

He must suck if you've never heard of him.

toovey107
07-04-2010, 03:04 AM
Well I suggest actually watching baseball or becoming familiar with a search engine.

Either or ....

Mell413
07-04-2010, 03:16 AM
I'm all for selling high on Marmol. That said I think we could get more in return than this.

Kinsm
07-04-2010, 03:23 AM
So are the Reds playing to win it all THIS year and possibly next year? Because there's no way they're going to throw Marmol a huge contract....It'd be ridiculous to spend a large percentage of your payroll on a closer.

Closer role is the most overrated position in the game.

Heck, this trade doesn't make any sense for Cincy

As a reds fan who has heard nothing of this reported by Sheldon, Fay, or WLW I'd say it's got no legs.

But as to the payroll statement...the Reds are already spending 12 million on a closer.

It doesn't make much sense for the Reds; Heisey might actually be starting over Stubbs in a couple of weeks at the rate he's going.

croce_99
07-04-2010, 03:35 AM
As a reds fan who has heard nothing of this reported by Sheldon, Fay, or WLW I'd say it's got no legs.

But as to the payroll statement...the Reds are already spending 12 million on a closer.

It doesn't make much sense for the Reds; Heisey might actually be starting over Stubbs in a couple of weeks at the rate he's going.

Yup, like I said earlier....there's a reason PSD filters out a few websites, including the one that made this rumor.

Again, if it happens by Sunday Night (like the guy wrote) then I will be amazed.

Captain Obvious
07-04-2010, 03:35 AM
As a reds fan who has heard nothing of this reported by Sheldon, Fay, or WLW I'd say it's got no legs.

But as to the payroll statement...the Reds are already spending 12 million on a closer.

It doesn't make much sense for the Reds; Heisey might actually be starting over Stubbs in a couple of weeks at the rate he's going.

Holy BP Oil Spill! He should be starting over Stubbs and his 32% K rate, .687 OPS, .315 wOBA, and -2.3 UZR now.

northsider
07-04-2010, 09:05 AM
So trading Marmol for this kid would be considered selling high????

giventofly
07-04-2010, 09:28 AM
Holy BP Oil Spill! He should be starting over Stubbs and his 32% K rate, .687 OPS, .315 wOBA, and -2.3 UZR now.
Where did you get those numbers from? :shrug:

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=3978&position=OF

And he has shown to strike out much, much less in the minors, so I doubt the 32% is something we can expect for a career.

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=paQ06024&position=OF

CUBDOM4life
07-04-2010, 09:28 AM
Beef up that farm.

I'd love this. Relievers aren't worth 1/4 of what they're payed.

CUBDOM4life
07-04-2010, 09:32 AM
So trading Marmol for this kid would be considered selling high????

Yes. NO reliever is worth 10 mil dollars (what he'll eventually make). Not one.

Sell high on a very inconsistent reliever, and bring in a couple good prospects.

Not to mention all the depth we have in BP arms on the farm.

northsider
07-04-2010, 09:51 AM
Yes. NO reliever is worth 10 mil dollars (what he'll eventually make). Not one.

Sell high on a very inconsistent reliever, and bring in a couple good prospects.

Not to mention all the depth we have in BP arms on the farm.

I agree on the money part but, you saying in bring in a couple when I am talking about Marmol for just this kid Heisey.

windycityD
07-04-2010, 09:54 AM
Only in baseball can bloggrs and writers make up trades without anything resembling first-hand knowledge. Ah, this supposed done deal wont happen.

Tabou71
07-04-2010, 09:55 AM
send them marmol,lee, and bird for votto

BcEuAbRsS
07-04-2010, 10:08 AM
send them marmol,lee, and bird for votto

And watch Dusty stab you in the eye with his toothpick just for saying that...

gocubs2118
07-04-2010, 10:57 AM
send them marmol,lee, and bird for votto

You can't even spell Byrd right :(

CUBDOM4life
07-04-2010, 11:03 AM
send them marmol,lee, and bird for votto

Is this a serious suggestion?

Str1fe5
07-04-2010, 11:07 AM
I'm most alarmed about how high the Cubs seem to be about keeping Cashner in the bullpen for his career than anything else...

tonytram
07-04-2010, 11:37 AM
all the cubs need a 6th outfielder

Tyking4
07-04-2010, 11:48 AM
6 outfielders sounds real nice, I gotta love it. Taking away one of our best arms in the pen sounds even better. Loving that, too.

bulldog312
07-04-2010, 12:21 PM
Uhmm, if it means the Cubs have found someone to unload Fukudome to, then I like it. But right now, where is he going to play? I would like to trade Marmol before he hits free agency, but I think they can do a lot better than this (and have plenty of time).

excillon
07-04-2010, 12:46 PM
Uhmm, if it means the Cubs have found someone to unload Fukudome to, then I like it. But right now, where is he going to play? I would like to trade Marmol before he hits free agency, but I think they can do a lot better than this (and have plenty of time).


Or Soriano, please god let us trade Soriano...


Really though, I can't see trading Marmol for a soon to be 26 year old rookie unless either Fuku or Soriano was going somewhere. You're just adding to an overcrowded OF otherwise, unless, and I hope not, Hendry is trying to sell high on Byrd. This is why JH pisses me off though, he doesn't focus on the immediate problems. Trade Lee, Lilly and A-ram. Two potential free agents and a declining injury prone overpaid 3B. At least dump A-ram now while he has SOME value left. Anaheim and Seattle might be interested, or even Philly given the Utley and Polanco injuries. They could just DH him if they made it to the series, if not, then make his life miserable so he opts out and call up Vitters for next year.

toovey107
07-04-2010, 12:53 PM
I'm most alarmed about how high the Cubs seem to be about keeping Cashner in the bullpen for his career than anything else...
Yeah I also find that kind of unsettling. I always thought Cashner was a lock to be a starter ... but eh I'm not so sure.

Doogolas
07-04-2010, 01:13 PM
I disagree. Mariano Rivera is worth every penny of what he makes from the Yankees.

Kirel
07-04-2010, 01:14 PM
I disagree. Mariano Rivera is worth every penny of what he makes from the Yankees.
When the Cubs can afford 200 million we'll talk.

Being worth it doesn't mean its a good idea. Efficiency isn't about bare minimum worth, it's about best bang for the buck.

Doogolas
07-04-2010, 01:18 PM
When the Cubs can afford 200 million we'll talk.

Being worth it doesn't mean its a good idea. Efficiency isn't about bare minimum worth, it's about best bang for the buck.

Ha, I didn't say it meant anything. I was referring ONLY to Mo. Because the one guy said: No closer is worth what they're paid, or something to that affect.

Ah, here it is:


Yes. NO reliever is worth 10 mil dollars (what he'll eventually make). Not one.


That's what I was responding to.

Cubs420
07-04-2010, 02:08 PM
I don't mind trading away Marmol for a top prospect but another outfielder? Lets get a power hitting first or 3rd basemen or a solid young arm.. why are we trading are best reliever in years for the position we are most deep...

Mell413
07-04-2010, 02:12 PM
If we are looking to trade Marmol I would look to trade him to Boston. Their bullpen has been bad and they have a better farm system. Maybe you can get someone like Lars Anderson for him. If we are going to trade Marmol I want a potential impact bat and Heisey is not it.

Jilly Bohnson
07-04-2010, 02:13 PM
I'm most alarmed about how high the Cubs seem to be about keeping Cashner in the bullpen for his career than anything else...

Nothing from anyone even remotely reliable points to this.

Captain Obvious
07-04-2010, 02:25 PM
Where did you get those numbers from? :shrug:

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=3978&position=OF

And he has shown to strike out much, much less in the minors, so I doubt the 32% is something we can expect for a career.

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=paQ06024&position=OF

No, those are Stubbs' numbers, not Heisley's.

Milnertime
07-04-2010, 02:42 PM
When the Cubs can afford 200 million we'll talk.

Being worth it doesn't mean its a good idea. Efficiency isn't about bare minimum worth, it's about best bang for the buck.
Which is why the Cardinals essentially overpaid for Holliday when they were bidding against themselves.

They gave him what he's worth, not what the market value for him was.

Cubs420
07-04-2010, 02:47 PM
If we are looking to trade Marmol I would look to trade him to Boston. Their bullpen has been bad and they have a better farm system. Maybe you can get someone like Lars Anderson for him. If we are going to trade Marmol I want a potential impact bat and Heisey is not it.

+1

my thoughts as well.

WOwolfOL
07-04-2010, 02:54 PM
Don't trade him in the division!

packerbacker77
07-04-2010, 03:40 PM
if it happens part of the deal woud be for the reds to take fukodome's contract and opening right for colvin in two years henry in center covin in right and jackson in left best young outfield in mlb

Captain Obvious
07-04-2010, 03:41 PM
if it happens part of the deal woud be for the reds to take fukodome's contract and opening right for colvin in two years henry in center covin in right and jackson in left best young outfield in mlb

Who the hell is Henry?

TruantGamer
07-04-2010, 04:17 PM
Hmm makes me wonder if JH is loading up for a bigger trade. Wouldn't put it past the guy. No signs point to that, just a thought is all. Though I would think marmol in a package would be worth more.

Yagyu+
07-04-2010, 05:05 PM
Who the hell is Henry?

Rodriguez! H-Rod. The man who made it rain candy bars in left field.

GOCUBSGO20
07-04-2010, 07:45 PM
I read the comments and this writer said that the Cubs asked for Travis Wood instead of a reliever and therefore the deal is very unlikely to happen now.

gobears_32
07-04-2010, 09:09 PM
Rodriguez! H-Rod. The man who made it rain candy bars in left field.

OH yes! The great "Oh henry!" bars

BUD Bleachers
07-05-2010, 12:16 AM
The Cubs trade Carlos Marmol....

Um...

Well...

Who the F Cares?

What difference would it really make? Trade them all.

toovey107
07-05-2010, 12:22 AM
The Cubs trade Carlos Marmol....

Um...

Well...

Who the F Cares?

What difference would it really make? Trade them all.
Honestly, What the **** is wrong with you ?

This is a serious question.

eriod
07-05-2010, 12:47 AM
Honestly, What the **** is wrong with you ?

This is a serious question.

He's clearly frustrated with the team, or he's emulating the frustration a lot of Cubs fans are feeling. And while I don't put much stock in this "rumor" and think this particular trade would be a horrible one (way undervaluing Marmol), Marmol is one of the few players (along with Lilly, and maybe Byrd) for whom the Cubs could get good returns right now. Clearly the Cubs aren't going anywhere this season, and with several overblown contracts hanging around the team's neck like chains, the Cubs might as well trade those players who can get them something good back.

Edit: "Overblown" was a poor choice of words; instead, say "untradeable" (unless they want to dump money without getting anything decent in return).

Tehjosha
07-05-2010, 12:55 AM
Honestly, What the **** is wrong with you ?

This is a serious question.

Actually, there's nothing wrong with him at all. This team is horrible, and needs a serious overhaul. Although I would be disappointed to lose Marmol, he would bring back one of the better packages of any of the Cubs players.

If Hendry can get a good deal for Marmol, bye bye.

Guny Highway
07-05-2010, 01:00 AM
Marmol is going to be making 10 mil+ very soon. And he's inconsistent. And the Cubs have more pen arms kickiing around in the minors than Pinella has career wins. Spending big on relievers is rarely a good idea, and it's certainly not what you build a team around.


Spending big on long term scholarship players isn't a good idea either.
Marmol has actually been very conistent this year.

Tehjosha
07-05-2010, 01:05 AM
Spending big on long term scholarship players isn't a good idea either.
Marmol has actually been very conistent this year.

"Spending big on long term scholarship players" makes no ****ing sense to me.

Marmol will be eligible for large pay increases over the next few years. The Cubs have a ton of arms who can step in to the pen. If you get the right deal, Marmol goes.

toovey107
07-05-2010, 01:52 AM
Actually, there's nothing wrong with him at all. This team is horrible, and needs a serious overhaul. Although I would be disappointed to lose Marmol, he would bring back one of the better packages of any of the Cubs players.

If Hendry can get a good deal for Marmol, bye bye.
You're missing my point completely.

I've claimed many times this team needs a new look and I have stated throughout this thread that trading Marmol would be a fantastic idea, if the value in return is there.

I'm just so damn sick of him as a poster in general.

yuns554
07-05-2010, 02:28 AM
"Spending big on long term scholarship players" makes no ****ing sense to me.

Marmol will be eligible for large pay increases over the next few years. The Cubs have a ton of arms who can step in to the pen. If you get the right deal, Marmol goes.

Ur kidding right? Marmol is hands down our best pitcher in the bullpen it wont be that easy to replace him.

toovey107
07-05-2010, 02:35 AM
Ur kidding right? Marmol is hands down our best pitcher in the bullpen it wont be that easy to replace him.
You do realize closers are the most overrated position in baseball right?. Not to mention you just don't pay relief pitchers over 10 million dollars, which if the way things progress that's what he'll demand ... and someone will be desperate enough to give him. Do we have a guy in our minors that could come in and spell Marmol without skipping a beat? No, but we sure as hell could fill his role and many others in the BP and still be very effective.

Like I mentioned before, producing quality relief arms through your minor league system ... let them have some success and then when they are due a pay raise in the near future ... you ship them out at a ransom (so to speak). Marmol's value may never be higher, and if you can net a quality prospect or two (especially closer to the deadline) then you sure as hell do it.

croce_99
07-05-2010, 03:46 AM
I read the comments and this writer said that the Cubs asked for Travis Wood instead of a reliever and therefore the deal is very unlikely to happen now.

He's making that up, too.

Some guy running a blog site doesn't have insider information that other sportswriters "can't" access.

(this isn't directed towards you in particular)
But no more linking to that site. It's horrible.

Guny Highway
07-05-2010, 09:37 AM
You do realize closers are the most overrated position in baseball right?. Not to mention you just don't pay relief pitchers over 10 million dollars, which if the way things progress that's what he'll demand ... and someone will be desperate enough to give him. Do we have a guy in our minors that could come in and spell Marmol without skipping a beat? No, but we sure as hell could fill his role and many others in the BP and still be very effective.

Like I mentioned before, producing quality relief arms through your minor league system ... let them have some success and then when they are due a pay raise in the near future ... you ship them out at a ransom (so to speak). Marmol's value may never be higher, and if you can net a quality prospect or two (especially closer to the deadline) then you sure as hell do it.


Again, I would argue that the closer position is not easily interchangeable nor is is easy to replace somone with the stuff Marmol has. Hendry brought in Kevin Gregg in 2009 and he single handedly blew our chances to build a lead and stay even with the Cardinals. The closer along with some key injury's was our achilles heal in 2009.

And honestly I believe in rewarding players that earn it. Marmol has some of the best stuff I have seen in a long time, and his control is getting better.

Mell413
07-05-2010, 10:45 AM
Again, I would argue that the closer position is not easily interchangeable nor is is easy to replace somone with the stuff Marmol has. Hendry brought in Kevin Gregg in 2009 and he single handedly blew our chances to build a lead and stay even with the Cardinals. The closer along with some key injury's was our achilles heal in 2009.

And honestly I believe in rewarding players that earn it. Marmol has some of the best stuff I have seen in a long time, and his control is getting better.

Not a lot of pitchers are going to have the stuff that Marmol has. That said finding someone to get the last 3 outs of an inning should not be hard to find and not worth paying a lot of money to. Just because Gregg failed it does not justify paying a lot of money to a closer. Gregg was bad last year, but he did not single handedly blow our chances. He didn't help, but he was not the only reason we lost. Most of the blame should go on the offense. No one is saying give him away, but if you can get impact bat(s) back you have to do it. I'm not sure you can say Marmol's control is getting better. It's better compared to last year, but it's worse compared to 07 and 08.

Tabou71
07-05-2010, 10:58 AM
You can't even spell Byrd right :(

sheesh....do you really care i slipped up? word nazi

Tabou71
07-05-2010, 11:00 AM
Is this a serious suggestion?

and no it was not....i guess i forgot to put a "lol" or :rolleyes: or a :D behind it.

people are so up tight anymore. *****! always trying to bring someone down.

toovey107
07-05-2010, 11:23 AM
and no it was not....i guess i forgot to put a "lol" or :rolleyes: or a :D behind it.

people are so up tight anymore. *****! always trying to bring someone down.
How would you expect someone to react .... I've seen more outlandish things said on here before so it's not like your comment should be any different. You also have 50 posts so no one knows your reputation as a poster. So yeah I think it's safe to say maybe you should throw in a little something something at the end of your post , so you don't come across as a complete *******.

toovey107
07-05-2010, 11:24 AM
Again, I would argue that the closer position is not easily interchangeable nor is is easy to replace somone with the stuff Marmol has. Hendry brought in Kevin Gregg in 2009 and he single handedly blew our chances to build a lead and stay even with the Cardinals. The closer along with some key injury's was our achilles heal in 2009.

And honestly I believe in rewarding players that earn it. Marmol has some of the best stuff I have seen in a long time, and his control is getting better.
It's fine to disagree, but you are just simply missing the boat here.

thornga2
07-05-2010, 01:21 PM
I would trade Marmol, no doubt about it. Truly, the only people that I wouldn't trade on the entire roster are Colvin and Castro.

Doogolas
07-05-2010, 02:05 PM
I would trade Marmol, no doubt about it. Truly, the only people that I wouldn't trade on the entire roster are Colvin and Castro.

You would trade Soto before you'd trade Colvin?

Captain Obvious
07-05-2010, 02:09 PM
You would trade Soto before you'd trade Colvin?

Ya, Soto sucks, he's only hitting .266 with 8 HR and 21 RBI. We should send him down to AAA and see what Koyie Hill can bring to the table in a full time role.

Rndy
07-05-2010, 02:27 PM
Ya, Soto sucks, he's only hitting .266 with 8 HR and 21 RBI. We should send him down to AAA and see what Koyie Hill can bring to the table in a full time role.

Agreed. Koyie is a switch hitter. He can hit from both sides. And if Soto Cuts off his fingers he would never play again. Do we really want a 400 obp catcher clogging up the bases?

socherball
07-05-2010, 03:20 PM
Again, I would argue that the closer position is not easily interchangeable nor is is easy to replace somone with the stuff Marmol has. Hendry brought in Kevin Gregg in 2009 and he single handedly blew our chances to build a lead and stay even with the Cardinals. The closer along with some key injury's was our achilles heal in 2009.

And honestly I believe in rewarding players that earn it. Marmol has some of the best stuff I have seen in a long time, and his control is getting better.

That's how you get stuck with overpaid, underproducing teams.

socherball
07-05-2010, 03:26 PM
Agreed. Koyie is a switch hitter. He can hit from both sides. And if Soto Cuts off his fingers he would never play again. Do we really want a 400 obp catcher clogging up the bases?

Especially when the pitcher is batting behind him and thus you end up giving up an out to bunt him into scoring position. I mean if the catcher just didn't get on base, then the pitcher could swing away and you wouldn't have to give up that out.


I love the sarcasm on this board.

Cubs420
07-05-2010, 04:19 PM
I read the comments and this writer said that the Cubs asked for Travis Wood instead of a reliever and therefore the deal is very unlikely to happen now.

good, a player like Wood is what the Cubs should be asking for Marmol...

windycityD
07-05-2010, 07:33 PM
Elite closers are a commodity and Marmol is certainly that. That said, the very argument that elite closers are overrated & overpaid is the very condition that leads GMs to still spend sizeable payroll on less than elite guys like Gregg, year after year.

Marmol is worth nothing less than any one player in the current Top 25 list of prospects, plus another good spec. You wont find a lot of organizations willing & able to make that level of trade commitment.

Darwinist
07-05-2010, 07:42 PM
Elite closers are a commodity and Marmol is certainly that. That said, the very argument that elite closers are overrated & overpaid is the very condition that leads GMs to still spend sizeable payroll on less than elite guys like Gregg, year after year.

Marmol is worth nothing less than any one player in the current Top 25 list of prospects, plus another good spec. You wont find a lot of organizations willing & able to make that level of trade commitment.


If he is an elite commodity like you say, then someone would be willing to make that trade.

thornga2
07-05-2010, 09:33 PM
You would trade Soto before you'd trade Colvin?

Yeah because I think he has more value. A contending team that needs a catcher might give up a lot for him.

Doogolas
07-05-2010, 09:35 PM
Yeah because I think he has more value. A contending team that needs a catcher might give up a lot for him.

Sure, but the problem is getting fair value for him is almost impossible. He'd require an INSANELY good prospect that most teams don't give up for just about anything. Otherwise we're getting ripped off. Because he's a top 5 offensive catcher in baseball right now.

Jilly Bohnson
07-05-2010, 09:45 PM
Yeah because I think he has more value. A contending team that needs a catcher might give up a lot for him.

Soto's much less replaceable though. I mean Castillo's the closest thing we have to a catching prospect and he's probably no more than a good backup in the Ramon Castro mold. And there's not any good catchers on the horizon on the FA market either, unless you think Vmart has several more years behind the plate, which I personally do not.

I think Soto is the person that we should least be looking to trade on the roster. The turnaround for this team is not going to take long, Soto will probably be here for the next good Cubs team. And there's not really any good players to fill his role on the horizon from inside or out.

Doogolas
07-05-2010, 09:46 PM
Soto's much less replaceable though. I mean Castillo's the closest thing we have to a catching prospect and he's probably no more than a good backup in the Ramon Castro mold. And there's not any good catchers on the horizon on the FA market either, unless you think Vmart has several more years behind the plate, which I personally do not.

I think Soto is the person that we should least be looking to trade on the roster. The turnaround for this team is not going to take long, Soto will probably be here for the next good Cubs team. And there's not really any good players to fill his role on the horizon from inside or out.

Yeah, this too.

Yagyu+
07-05-2010, 11:35 PM
Yeah because I think he has more value. A contending team that needs a catcher might give up a lot for him.

Dodgers are regretting giving up catching in Santana. They got Casey Blake, sure, but it's hard to find good help behind the plate.

EDIT: But Marmol was a catcher...?

WolvesJagsOs
07-06-2010, 12:14 AM
agreed. I would hate to lose Soto, playing amazing as of late.

Flamarlins21
07-07-2010, 12:06 AM
I am a little late on this.

I don't get this trade at all. Yes, the Cubs have a replacement in Cashner but Heisey is not any better than what the Cubs how now in Soriano, Colvin, or Byrd. Heisey could start but is more of a 4th outfielder. Marmol is having a great year and should be able to get better player or package for him. I just don't think this could be serious unless the Reds added in another player.

Captain Obvious
07-07-2010, 12:14 AM
I am a little late on this.

I don't get this trade at all. Yes, the Cubs have a replacement in Cashner but Heisey is not any better than what the Cubs how now in Soriano, Colvin, or Byrd. Heisey could start but is more of a 4th outfielder. Marmol is having a great year and should be able to get better player or package for him. I just don't think this could be serious unless the Reds added in another player.

Have you done ANY research on this at all?

Flamarlins21
07-07-2010, 12:21 AM
Have you done ANY research on this at all?

I saw the report, what other research do you want? I assume it's not true, I was just commenting.

Captain Obvious
07-07-2010, 12:23 AM
I saw the report, what other research do you want? I assume it's not true, I was just commenting.

Then how can you say that he is not better than Byrd, Soriano, and Colvin? He is definitely NOT a 4th OFer. Colvin is more of a 4th OFer than Heisley.

Flamarlins21
07-07-2010, 12:27 AM
Then how can you say that he is not better than Byrd, Soriano, and Colvin? He is definitely NOT a 4th OFer. Colvin is more of a 4th OFer than Heisley.

Well I did watch Heisey play for an entire year in 08. Maybe I'm not giving him enough credit. He had a great season in Double-A (where I saw him) but I just didn't think he'd be a legit big league regular.
A scout did see him as an Aaron Rowand type player.

Captain Obvious
07-07-2010, 12:28 AM
Well I did watch Heisey play for an entire year in 08. Maybe I'm not giving him enough credit. He had a great season in Double-A (where I saw him) but I just didn't think he'd be a legit big league regular.
A scout did see him as an Aaron Rowand type player.

You are right, you've seen him play, you know what he can do.

Flamarlins21
07-07-2010, 12:30 AM
You are right, you've seen him play, you know what he can do.

I'm not just some ignorant fan who doesn't know anything. I have seen tons of great players come through the minors, and a good amount of bad ones. I'm not saying Heisey is horrible. He's a good player. I just don't think he's worth Marmol.

Captain Obvious
07-07-2010, 12:32 AM
I'm not just some ignorant fan who doesn't know anything. I have seen tons of great players come through the minors, and a good amount of bad ones. I'm not saying Heisey is horrible. He's a good player. I just don't think he's worth Marmol.

You do know that the human eye is very deceiving, right? Stats don't lie.

Granted, Stats don't say everything about young players, but when the dude is raking in the minors, you have to think he'll have some sort of major league success.

Flamarlins21
07-07-2010, 12:34 AM
You do know that the human eye is very deceiving, right? Stats don't lie.

Granted, Stats don't say everything about young players, but when the dude is raking in the minors, you have to think he'll have some sort of major league success.

yes, Heisey is a really good solid player and will be a good big leaguer but I don't think him alone is worth Marmol.

Captain Obvious
07-07-2010, 12:39 AM
yes, Heisey is a really good solid player and will be a good big leaguer but I don't think him alone is worth Marmol.

I agree, because we can get more for him. But, he's a nice main piece to a deal, imo.

Flamarlins21
07-07-2010, 12:42 AM
I agree, because we can get more for him. But, he's a nice main piece to a deal, imo.

Right. Heisey and Valiquette or Cozart (even though you don't need him) or Klinker might be more "fair"