GatewayRedbirds.com

don't try to fix something that isn't broke

I'll add that if the Cubs somehow win the WS this year, trading Arrieta for a king's ransom will definitely be on Theo's mind if he can't get Jake to sign a reasonable contract for a pitcher of his age.

I'm not saying they will do it but Theo is definitely DEFINITELY going to be thinking about it. And if a team makes the right offer, he would absolutely jump on it. Nobody is untouchable right now except for maybe Rizzo, Bryant, and Russell.

Hendricks has gone 6+ innings in 4 of 6 starts this year, never less than 5 IP. Gray and Teheran both are at 5 of 8 for that mark, with both failing to make the 5th inning at least once(twice in Gray's case).

But that's really beside the point, even if we accept that Gray and Teheran are upgrades(and I like Teheran more than davhern), trading Hendricks to get them is counter productive for the reasons I've already mentioned(he's been terrific this year, and he's the youngest and longest controlled member of the rotation).

Sure, if push came to shove and the A's said 'we absolutely have to have Hendricks, him for Gray straight up or no deal' then you'd definitely consider it. But if Hendricks is so fungible why would any other team take that stance, especially when there's higher upside players in the Cubs major and minor leagues that are less essential to the current team?

You do realize that if the Cubs want to acquire a TOR at the deadline, they are going to have throw some chips on the table right? They can't just offer Soler for Gray straight up and think that is going to get it done.

Yes, that's why I said this originally.

Part of the upshot of using free agency for filling their needs last year is that it kept their trade assets available for future use, they probably don't need to trade Hendricks when you have MLB pieces like Soler, Baez, or even Schwarber who don't have a permanent home yet, and a fairly deep farm system that hasn't seen its depth hurt by other win-now trades.

You seem to be trying to simultaneously claim that Hendricks obviously needs to be ditched for the Cubs rotation to improve while also implying that teams will insist on trading for him, do you see the paradox?

Transmogrified Tiger wrote:Yes, that's why I said this originally.

Part of the upshot of using free agency for filling their needs last year is that it kept their trade assets available for future use, they probably don't need to trade Hendricks when you have MLB pieces like Soler, Baez, or even Schwarber who don't have a permanent home yet, and a fairly deep farm system that hasn't seen its depth hurt by other win-now trades.

You seem to be trying to simultaneously claim that Hendricks obviously needs to be ditched for the Cubs rotation to improve while also implying that teams will insist on trading for him, do you see the paradox?

We call that Cards Talk logic.

tacoman wrote:You do realize that if the Cubs want to acquire a TOR at the deadline, they are going to have throw some chips on the table right? They can't just offer Soler for Gray straight up and think that is going to get it done.

They got Russell for a couple months of Samardzija

Arrieta's contract will totally depend on how he does the rest of this year and next year. If he continues dominating, he may get something like Greinke got (6/$200). If not....he's still going to get a lot. Maybe more like what Cueto got (6/$130).

pioneer98 wrote:Arrieta's contract will totally depend on how he does the rest of this year and next year. If he continues dominating, he may get something like Greinke got (6/$200). If not....he's still going to get a lot. Maybe more like what Cueto got (6/$130).

LOL if 6/$130 was a possibility, the Cubs would have already inked that deal.

Transmogrified Tiger wrote:Yes, that's why I said this originally.

Part of the upshot of using free agency for filling their needs last year is that it kept their trade assets available for future use, they probably don't need to trade Hendricks when you have MLB pieces like Soler, Baez, or even Schwarber who don't have a permanent home yet, and a fairly deep farm system that hasn't seen its depth hurt by other win-now trades.

You seem to be trying to simultaneously claim that Hendricks obviously needs to be ditched for the Cubs rotation to improve while also implying that teams will insist on trading for him, do you see the paradox?

I don't see the paradox because if a team is going to give up a TOR, they're probably going to want to get at least some pitching back and probably a stud batter. So Hendricks eases the pain of losing a TOR. If the Cubs want to get Gray, they're probably looking at giving up either Baez/Soler and Hendricks + prospect.