After Cole, what?

[JBR]

14 hours ago, wopphil said:

Let's say we sign Cole on Tuesday. Then what? We can't be done at that point. There will presumably be a little money left to play with, a few trade chips in the farm, and plenty of holes still to fix. 

What is Eppler's next move in the hopeful event we get Cole this week? We need another couple of talented pieces after Cole.

I like an idea @Chuckster70proposed of a trade involving Contreras/Darvish. If the Cubs would eat enough of Darvish's deal, that could be a trade worth moving some of our better chips.

 

I wonder if Upton would play 1B to save his legs. If so, then maybe the Angels can keep Adell and Marsh to surround Trout in the near future, and purchase a 1-yr placeholder for RF, maybe Calhoun? Sadly it would then be time to say goodbye to Albert. Just no need to roster him if Upton can play first. 

For rotation, sign Porcello as a buy low on the potential that the change of scenery will do some good. He eats innings consistently and has shown much better results in past than 2019. The value of someone reliably taking the ball every fifth day can’t be overstated with the injury risks on this rotation. 
 
For lineup, get Donaldson and his 4-5 WAR in there. Now you have tons of infield flexibility. That way Cozart can play (backup really) his more natural position up the middle. 
 

Maybe this is going more expensive that Arte wants but it’s hard to imagine the Angels winning a wild card spot without spending huge. The gaps on the roster are just too big. 

[floplag]

For me, its simple right now...
Sign Cole.
Make the trade with he cubs to get Contreras, either Darvish or Chatwood, AND Bryant.  Roster solved for the immediate future.  
Eventually Upton will be a 1B, but not till the post Pujols or hurt Pujols era begins.  

Crazy idea/thought...
I wonder, if that were realistic, how many of you would consider taking on  Heyward if it meant not giving up Marsh or Adell? 
Give them Goodwin, they take Cozart, we eat Heyward who slots in RF this year and has the height  and athleticism to play 1B as needed a la Erstad?  We maintain the trio we all want in the OF with Heyward as the most expensive 4th OF is history but give up only second tier kids? 
Maybe something like Contreras, Bryant, Chatwood, Heyward for Cozart, Goodwin, Rengifo or Jones, Ward some other second tier prospect? 
They solve their issues and payroll concerns with about 30M in saving with 14 going Chi way with 45 coming ours... add 30+ for Cole it fits under the tax for us.  Were out of the FA market for the next few years but i dont think we would need to be either. 
Just a crazy idea that im sure wont happen but, m,ight fit.

[Docwaukee]

2 minutes ago, floplag said:

For me, its simple right now...
Sign Cole.
Make the trade with he cubs to get Contreras, either Darvish or Chatwood, AND Bryant.  Roster solved for the immediate future.  
Eventually Upton will be a 1B, but not till the post Pujols or hurt Pujols era begins.  

Crazy idea/thought...
I wonder, if that were realistic, how many of you would consider taking on  Heyward if it meant not giving up Marsh or Adell? 
Give them Goodwin, they take Cozart, we eat Heyward who slots in RF this year and has the height  and athleticism to play 1B as needed a la Erstad?  We maintain the trio we all want in the OF with Heyward as the most expensive 4th OF is history but give up only second tier kids? 
Maybe something like Contreras, Bryant, Chatwood, Heyward for Cozart, Goodwin, Rengifo or Jones, Ward some other second tier prospect? 
They solve their issues and payroll concerns with about 30M in saving with 14 going Chi way with 45 coming ours... add 30+ for Cole it fits under the tax for us.  Were out of the FA market for the next few years but i dont think we would need to be either. 
Just a crazy idea that im sure wont happen but, m,ight fit.

frankly, I really wouldn't care if Arte wanted to spend in order to get some good players for less prospect value as long as it didn't inhibit the future but I think it would.  I also think the argument falls a part with the inclusion of Bryant.  I just don't see the cubs taking less for him as part of a salary dump unless it was a Dogs/Boston type clearance sale where it set the Cubs free almost all their poorly spent money.  Like Darvish, Chatwood, Heyward and Kimbrel.  

If you could keep Marsh and Adell but still acquire Contreras and Darvish without giving up Fletcher as well, that would be pretty impressive.  The problem is that the cubs still want to compete and they need a CFer/leadoff guy.  Getting prospects doesn't necessarily help them a ton unless you're talking about a 3 team deal.  

[floplag]

5 minutes ago, Dochalo said:

frankly, I really wouldn't care if Arte wanted to spend in order to get some good players for less prospect value as long as it didn't inhibit the future but I think it would.  I also think the argument falls a part with the inclusion of Bryant.  I just don't see the cubs taking less for him as part of a salary dump unless it was a Dogs/Boston type clearance sale where it set the Cubs free almost all their poorly spent money.  Like Darvish, Chatwood, Heyward and Kimbrel.  

If you could keep Marsh and Adell but still acquire Contreras and Darvish without giving up Fletcher as well, that would be pretty impressive.  The problem is that the cubs still want to compete and they need a CFer/leadoff guy.  Getting prospects doesn't necessarily help them a ton unless you're talking about a 3 team deal.  

All fair of course.   
They could address the immediate need in CF with a short term FA signing, Pillar for example or thats why i added Goodwin he could give them that but i suppose then they would need a RF, maybe Catellanos with some of the savings?   
In the end i'm just throwing something crazy out there for discussion.

[Stradling]

You can probably pry Contreras away from the Cubs by taking on one of their big contracts, like Darvish or Heyward or Kimbrel, but there is zero reason for the Cubs to include any of their other guys like Shwarber or Bryant.  I also am not sure you can get Contreras and Darvish, and not have to include Marsh.  

[totdprods]

3 minutes ago, Stradling said:

You can probably pry Contreras away from the Cubs by taking on one of their big contracts, like Darvish or Heyward or Kimbrel, but there is zero reason for the Cubs to include any of their other guys like Shwarber or Bryant.  I also am not sure you can get Contreras and Darvish, and not have to include Marsh.  

Schwarber isn’t *that* good. He could sort of fill that 1B/LF/RF?/DH rotation.

[Stradling]

3 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Schwarber isn’t *that* good. He could sort of fill that 1B/LF/RF?/DH rotation.

He may not be that good, but he isn’t a guy you throw in a deal as the third guy to get rid of a contract like Darvish.  

[Docwaukee]

2 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Schwarber isn’t *that* good. He could sort of fill that 1B/LF/RF?/DH rotation.

he's the guy that people dream on at the plate so he gets a bit overrated because everyone sees the next JD Martinez if he's put into the right situation.  

[Claude]

2 minutes ago, totdprods said:

Schwarber isn’t *that* good. He could sort of fill that 1B/LF/RF?/DH rotation.

Joe Maddon would certainly have to approve any trade involving Schwarber. 

[Lou]

19 hours ago, Brandon said:

I know the feeling

that's why I take the stairs

[floplag]

one of a few such articles ive read of late...
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/12/cubs-reportedly-signaling-need-to-clear-payroll.html

[totdprods]

16 minutes ago, Stradling said:

He may not be that good, but he isn’t a guy you throw in a deal as the third guy to get rid of a contract like Darvish.  

Right - he’s cheap and young enough for the Cubs too that I doubt he’d be one they part with. Plus they need OF help and have 1B sort of locked up with Rizzo.

Contreras is a much more viable trade chip, as is Bryant.

[totdprods]

I know he’s pretty polarizing here, but Matt Boyd would still be interesting depending on the cost. 

If he finds his first half potential and keeps it, and Bundy even just takes a small step forward, it’s starting to look like a good rotation with or without Cole, and one that’s fairly cheap and controlled. 

[Stradling]

Another name I keep going back to on the trade market is Chris Archer.  For some reason I have a feeling we will be in on him.  Obviously with Maddon he will have an opinion on him based on not just having him as a pitcher but being isn’t he same division as him the last couple of years.  His cost isn’t too high and if the team thinks that Callaway can help him make adjustments then maybe he along with Bundy are a direction they might go.  I think I prefer Keuchel based on innings.  

[floplag]

1 minute ago, Stradling said:

Another name I keep going back to on the trade market is Chris Archer.  For some reason I have a feeling we will be in on him.  Obviously with Maddon he will have an opinion on him based on not just having him as a pitcher but being isn’t he same division as him the last couple of years.  His cost isn’t too high and if the team thinks that Callaway can help him make adjustments then maybe he along with Bundy are a direction they might go.  I think I prefer Keuchel based on innings.  

i had a similar thought... if the Bucs are looking to move Marte, he cant be far behind and based on recent performance shouldn't be too expensive even though they will try to get top value, i dont think anyone gives it to them. 

[totdprods]

30 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Another name I keep going back to on the trade market is Chris Archer.  For some reason I have a feeling we will be in on him.  Obviously with Maddon he will have an opinion on him based on not just having him as a pitcher but being isn’t he same division as him the last couple of years.  His cost isn’t too high and if the team thinks that Callaway can help him make adjustments then maybe he along with Bundy are a direction they might go.  I think I prefer Keuchel based on innings.  

Could definitely see that too. I know everyone’s eyes will roll a million miles an hour right out of the back of their skulls, but Archer, Bundy, and Heaney  begins hopefully Cole and Ohtani could be a pretty solid rotation if something clicks for those guys. 

[CanadianHalo]

I was told numerous times here that we’re not adding 3 pitchers.

So it’s sounding like it’ll be Cole and Bundy or Stras and Bundy 

[totdprods]

29 minutes ago, CanadianHalo said:

I was told numerous times here that we’re not adding 3 pitchers.

So it’s sounding like it’ll be Cole and Bundy or Stras and Bundy 

Eppler said he’d like to add two.

But I think that was before Odorizzi took the QO, before Wheeler got a $118m deal for stay East where he wanted, before Hamels got an $18m AAV deal, before MadBum started getting $100m offers, and before some lower guys like Gibson and Lyles got surprising deals.

Could be that, if he can’t get the really good second arm behind Cole (which is also not a done deal), he might need to stretch it out to three pitchers. 

[ukyah]

i keep saying it over and over, but the angels need to keep marsh and adell. not only because they are clearly the two best prospects the angels have had for a good while, but also, most importantly, they are CHEAP for a good long while. that's how the angels can afford to go overbudget at the other positions. it is imperative they do not trade EITHER ONE.

[wopphil]

6 hours ago, Stradling said:

You can probably pry Contreras away from the Cubs by taking on one of their big contracts, like Darvish or Heyward or Kimbrel, but there is zero reason for the Cubs to include any of their other guys like Shwarber or Bryant.  I also am not sure you can get Contreras and Darvish, and not have to include Marsh.  

I think you absolutely have to include Marsh, and should do so if necessary. Contreras has a ton of trade value, and Darvish's deal isn't looking so bad at the moment. 

I could be on board with something like Marsh, Sandoval, Will Wilson and Cozart for Contreras, Darvish and 10-15 mil.

[Stradling]

21 minutes ago, wopphil said:

I think you absolutely have to include Marsh, and should do so if necessary. Contreras has a ton of trade value, and Darvish's deal isn't looking so bad at the moment. 

I could be on board with something like Marsh, Sandoval, Will Wilson and Cozart for Contreras, Darvish and 10-15 mil.

Looking at Yu’s contract he is owed 4 years and 71 million for his age 33-36 seasons.  He had a 3 WAR last year and struck out 229 in just under 180 innings.  In today’s market that isn’t even an overpay.  He made 31 starts so he averaged just under 6 innings per start.  If he was in the AL I wonder if that would give him a few extra outs a month based on not having his spot in the line up come up.  

[ten ocho recon scout]

17 hours ago, Angelsfan1984 said:

Seriously though, everyone needs to relax and look at the real reason he hasn’t signed yet....he’s wondering the same thing I’ve been wondering for the last 3 years.

do squirrels get chapped lips?

Beavers do....

[wopphil]

26 minutes ago, Stradling said:

Looking at Yu’s contract he is owed 4 years and 71 million for his age 33-36 seasons.  He had a 3 WAR last year and struck out 229 in just under 180 innings.  In today’s market that isn’t even an overpay.  He made 31 starts so he averaged just under 6 innings per start.  If he was in the AL I wonder if that would give him a few extra outs a month based on not having his spot in the line up come up.  

Yeah, Darvish's contract isn't terrible. Maybe Cozart alone would offset the money sufficiently. 

[UndertheHalo]

7 hours ago, Stradling said:

Another name I keep going back to on the trade market is Chris Archer.  For some reason I have a feeling we will be in on him.  Obviously with Maddon he will have an opinion on him based on not just having him as a pitcher but being isn’t he same division as him the last couple of years.  His cost isn’t too high and if the team thinks that Callaway can help him make adjustments then maybe he along with Bundy are a direction they might go.  I think I prefer Keuchel based on innings.  

I’m with you on Archer.  I think he can be had at a relative bargain and I think it’s very possible that he can be fixed.  

[Pancake Bear]

1 minute ago, UndertheHalo said:

I’m with you on Archer.  I think he can be had at a relative bargain and I think it’s very possible that he can be fixed.  

Compare Cole on the Pirates vs. Astros and Archer on the Pirates vs. Rays. Pitching coach issues or decline for Archer?

Cole stopped throwing 2 seamers and started throwing high heat and going for K’s. Pirates has him pitching to contact.