Bruce Levine is reporting that the Cubs have received a trade proposal for Ryan Dempster though the specifics are unknown.
CHICAGO — The Los Angeles Dodgers have proposed a trade for Chicago Cubs starter Ryan Dempster, a baseball source told
The Cubs have been clear their top priority on the trade market is adding young pitching. It is unclear whether Zach Lee, the top-rated arm in Los Angeles' farm system, is included in the offer.
The Cubs appear to be making contingency plans in case a Dempster trade is completed. A major league source told ESPNChicago.com that talks are fluid and the team is preparing to have replacements in St. Louis this weekend in case a deal is completed for the veteran starter.
In what could be the first move of an active stretch, the Cubs acquired pitcher Justin Germano from the Boston Red Sox for cash considerations Thursday. In a corresponding transaction, right-hander Jairo Asencio was designated for assignment.
If the Cubs can get Lee for Dempster I'm going to be ecstatic. Lee was a midseason 49th ranked prospect by Baseball America. His value as a prospect would easily be $15 million so that would be a fantastic deal for the Cubs. It's hard for me to imagine the Dodgers giving up that much for a rental, but stranger things have probably happened.
Lee is a big guy and here's what Baseball America had to say prior to the season:
Lee has a deep arsenal and the pitchability to get the most out of it. His fastball generally ranges from 89-93 mph, but he can reach back for more when he needs it, touching as high as 98. He's a strike-thrower who commands his fastball to both sides of the plate. He also has an advanced feel for manipulating the ball to make it do what he wants against certain hitters. He can make his fastball sink, or turn it into a cutter that developed into a true weapon. Lee featured a hard curveball that tended to get slurvy in high school, but he worked on developing both a curve and slider as separate offerings in 2011. He made huge strides with the slider by the end of the season, allowing him to get in on the hands of lefthanders, who he held to a .229/.291/.341 line. The curve still shows promising spin and depth at 79-83 mph when it's on, but it continues to come and go. He also features an 81-84 mph changeup that has a chance to be an average pitch down the road.
I'll be surprised if the Cubs do this well. He's the top ranked Dodgers prospect and I just don't see an organization giving him up for Dempster's 2 months. Especially when you consider the Dodgers can't get draft picks at the end of the contract.
Justin Germano is 29 years old and has an ERA near 5 in 258 innings at the big league level. The guy has had fantastic control in the minor leagues (walks per 9 of about 1 to 2 over the last several years). His K/BB this year is over 5. I think he could fill in better than Chris Volstad could so this is a solid pick up for the Cubs.
Could Lee happen if Barney is included in the deal?
BubbaBiscuitQuote Reply
Check that from prev post. Another Scout shows up and is clocking both Yanks and Sox.
SVBQuote Reply
so with the new CBA the Cubs could offer Demp arb and if he signs somewhere else they get picks but LAD couldnt do the same if they trade for him?
dylanjQuote Reply
@ BubbaBiscuit:
I would worship Thoyer forever if they could sell high on Barney.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ BubbaBiscuit:
Yeah, but I’d actually want more in return than just Lee. I started writing an article about Barney earlier today. Hopefully I’ll have it published tomorrow. He’s not a good hitter, but he’s a valuable player. I think most here already know that and even if we throw out his rWAR because DRS is way off for him, he’s still a valuable player.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
The question no one is asking….Does Zach Lee do a Harry Caray impression??
mikeakaleroyQuote Reply
@ dylanj:
correct.
mb21Quote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
I don’t think they could sell high. I think they’d be selling low on him. I just don’t think you can get in return what he’s actually worth. If they can, great, but there’s nothing wrong with league average production for leage minimum.
mb21Quote Reply
not thrilled with spending over half our int’l budget on a 22 year old with age verification issues.
dylanjQuote Reply
but we are so desperate for impact SP talent that I can see Theo taking the chance that this guy will be MLB ready in 2 years.
dylanjQuote Reply
@ dylanj:
Realistically, they had a lot higher chance of getting someone up in 2 years if they signed several guys for $100,000. You hope this guy is an elite talent because otherwise it just doesn’t seem very smart.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
I dunno, I don’t think he’ll ever draw that return, but as an add-on to Dempster or GArza, he could maybe help max out their value. He’ll never be worth more in trade than he is now.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
I’d do Barney & Dempster for Gould & Lee
dylanjQuote Reply
@ dylanj:
Pretty sure that’s illegal in Kansas.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/07/royals-pirates-interested-in-paul-maholm.html
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
(dying laughing)
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2012/07/red-sox-in-on-garza-not-dempster.html
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ dylanj:
That’s much more fair than just for Lee.
MO is just wrong about Barney. The guy is valuable and if the Cubs give him away for nothing they’re crazy. Max value is almost always right now so if that’s what you like then you want every player traded today, but there’s no reason to think Barney is going to suddenly decline. He has a higher walk rate, lower strikeout rate, more power, an even better fielder, an above average baserunner and he’s not terrible at hitting. He’s not very good, but he’s not terrible either.
I don’t think the Cubs can get Lee for Dempster, but I’d definitely do Lee and Gould for Barney and Dempster. That would probably be a fair deal.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
I’m not playing down Barney’s value. Quite the opposite, in fact. But Barney is 27. He’s at his peak. It’s all age-based decline from here. So sell him while he’s playing well and can make a trade package that will net us young arms. I say sell him now because I think he’s very valuable and can help a team win now. But the Cub can’t be concerned with winning now. They need to be thinking about winning 2-3 years from now, and Barney probably won’t be nearly as valuable then as a 2B as he is now as a trade piece.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
I wouldn’t mind hanging on to Barney either. I’m reluctant to trade him because I don’t think you’ll get as much as he’s worth to the Cubs.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
Why hang on to something that is valuable now when you need people who will be valuable later? Sell Barney on while he’s peaking and build for later. Barney won’t be helping you in 3 years.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
it depends on what you can get. Let’s say you can somehow get $10 million in value for Dempster. I’m not including Barney in that deal if the Dodgers only up that to $15 million. Barney is worth more than that. I don’t care about the Cubs winning games, but value is value. I’d much rather have the Cubs getting his value than just giving him away for much less than he’s worth. This is all speculative since we don’t know what any team would offer. We don’t know what they’d offer for Dempster or for Barney. I certainly think they should explore it. I’m not at all opposed to that. I’d look into trade Castro and anyone else not named Rizzo too. I’d want a shitload in return for Castro, but I’d do it if some team offered it. I’m just not as confident as you that the Cubs can get what he’s worth and I don’t want them making a deal for less tha he’s worth. Make sense?
mb21Quote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
You still have to field a team next year and the year after. The bottom line is that I’m open to trade him or anyone else, but I want what they’re worth. I’m not making a deal just to make a deal. The Cubs will play baseball next year and they need guys to take the field. If Barney is their starting 2nd baseman they’re doing alright. They have time to trade him. He doesn’t need to go now. The guys the Cubs should be looking to move now for whatever the best offer is are Dempster, Garza, Maholm, Soriano, Soto, Marmol and maybe a couple others. Probably not all of the, but at least 4 of them should be gone.
mb21Quote Reply
Is Barney a Super Two? I don’t recall if we talked about that as I don’t read every word.
Also, just saw TDK again. Left after the Joker’s scenes were done. Mad props to Heath Ledger, always.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
@ mb21:
Yeah I see that, but there is what a player is worth, in the sense of absolute value, and then what a player is worth in the sense of what someone is willing to pay. I’m not sure any GM will ever be willing to pay what Barney is worth, because defense and baserunning aren’t “sexy” ways to be valuable. But They remain valuable, and Barney is as valuable right now as he will ever be in those areas, and he’s putting up decent enough offensive numbers to catch someone’s eye. Sometimes I think you have to sell a player when he reaches the point that someone is willing to give you something decent for him, even if it’s not exactly what that guys might be worth on paper.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ mb21:
Again, I agree in part, but I’m not holding on to Barney just because I can’t max out his trade value.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
No, he’s not a super 2. He won’t be eligible for arbitration until after next season.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
Okay, I thought he got brought up early enough to be Super Two but I stand corrected.
I like the part where the Pirates want Maholm back. Maybe.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
I’m not either, but I’m not giving him away either. If I’m the GM I’m not going to bend over and give away a valuable player who isn’t properly valued just because I don’t think I can get the value he’s actually worth. A win is still worth $5 million to the Cubs whether they suck or are awesome. I’d much rather take the 2 wins he’ll provide then get bent over. If you give away one player every GM around is going to be offering less than he should for other players. I don’t expect the Cubs to get what Barney is really worth because of the whole defense issue, but I also expect them to get something valuable for him. He’s a valuable player to the Cubs and if they’re going to trade him they should get something valuable in return.
mb21Quote Reply
small sample, but tyler colvin is actually hitting lefties well this year.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
Agreed. I wouldn’t sell him off for any old thing. Something like the package DJ suggested would be the floor for me with a package deal of Dempster/Garza+Barney.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
I think the Cubs can maybe get the best deal for Soriano in the offseason. Nobody trusts what they see from him right now. But if this lighter bat really is the key to his offensive resurgence, his projections might improve if he can keep this up (or anywhere close) for the rest of the year. They’ll never get a good prospect, but maybe the Cubs only have to eat 80% of the $38M left to get someone to take a shot.
He’s not blocking anyone, he’s not a problem in the clubhouse (in fact, his work ethic has been hailed by even people who seemingly hate him), and he’s probably the 3rd best hitter in the lineup at the moment, and they won’t get anything of any usefulness in return for the farm system. So I’m not in a rush to trade him.
Aisle424Quote Reply
Someone says Zach Lee isn’t being traded for a rental.
SVBQuote Reply
On Germano’s travel plans:
I believe that any player who is traded has 3 days to report to the new team. It would seem to be in his best interest to get to the Cubs ASAP, but maybe his wife is pregnant, or something like that, and that complicates things.
SVBQuote Reply
By the way guys, in case you didn’t notice. CUBS WIN.
I know the season is shot, but have you all given up on the little victories?
/nudge
SVBQuote Reply
SVB wrote:
The little victories are when they lose. Even in a shitty season where I look forward to loses and Astro wins, the Cubs still manage to disappoint me quite often.
BubbaBiscuitQuote Reply
josh wrote:
C- is a decent grade from me. C- = approval
At the beginning of each semester I ask every student, when they introduce themselves, to tell the class something they are Excellent at. You’d be surprised how many can’t think of an answer to that question. Then I explain that Excellent = A. Most of my drops occur in the first week. I like it that way.
/coughdickcough
SVBQuote Reply
mb21 wrote:
Why is DRS off for barney?
EnricoPallazzoQuote Reply
@ SVB:
what do you teach?
EnricoPallazzoQuote Reply
@ EnricoPallazzo:
I’m curious as well. I’m guessing History.
joshQuote Reply
@ SVB:
I aks my students what they think an average grade is and what they feel it requires. And then I tell them that the B they are imagining is really a C, and that all that means is that they got everything basically right and did nothing else remotely impressive. They are usually not enamored of this stance.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
mb21 wrote:
While I find value-based trade analyses generally useful and appreciate the work that you and others on this site do to pull them together, I’m not sure I agree with this statement. I think that you can make a pretty solid argument that the marginal value of each win can vary radically depending on where a team sits in the standings at any given point of the season, and in the case of the 2012 Cubs, that the marginal value of each win acquired from here on out would be minimal.
Likewise, the cost of acquiring a win varies based not only on what players are available on the market, but also on the circumstances of the team trying to acquire it. If a team has five starting pitchers that are 4 WAR players, the value of a 3 WAR starting pitcher is minimal as there’s no room for that player to contribute. I think that this point calls into question considering whether or not we should evaluate player value on a straight line, as a 10 WAR player would seemingly be more valuable than 10 one-WAR players — you can’t have ten guys on the field.
This has implications in valuing players in trades or to be signed. In the case of Barney, you could make the argument that the Cubs could bring in less value than Barney is worth in absolute terms (i.e. his projected WAR times $5 million less the projected salary obligations for the time he would be under club control) and still come out ahead. You’d need to project the marginal value of the WAR he’d contribute based on some understanding of the future success of the team over the next four years; if the return on Barney is higher than that, the Cubs come out ahead even if they ‘lose’ the trade. In this way, both teams could theoretically ‘win’ a deal.
Of course, trying to calculate that would be stupid difficult, and the level of guessing that you’d have to do to get there would likely make the result garbage anyway. Which, I assume, is why people analyze player value using a straight-line valuation of WAR. So I guess it’s more an art than a science, but worth keeping in mind as we evaluate the haul from the (hopefully) impending Cubs fire sale.
Hope that wasn’t overly pedantic, but I’ve been thinking about this for a while and it did seem to fit in the discussion you were having with MO.
uncle daveQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
I taught for two semesters, and didn’t have an awesome speech about what it takes to succeed in my class. I didn’t know what I was doing. I was a horrible teacher. 🙁
joshQuote Reply
@ EnricoPallazzo:
@ josh:
I teach Natural Resource Conservation, Policy Analysis, Forest Ecology, Fire Ecology, Silviculture…
Maybe I should do a “Who is SVB?” post like Mish did back in March.
SVBQuote Reply
@ josh:
Most grad schools don’t seem to care about helping their grad students learn to teach. They seem much more concerned to give us all several neuroses, ensuring we will end life divorced, poorly dressed, clothed in wool and smelling of cheap coffee.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ uncle dave:
My thought there is that the WAR to $$ estimate works because it looks at larger sample sizes. Maybe an extra literal win would get the Dodgers into the postseason, but if you look at just the second half of this season, it’s more difficult to say with confidence that you’re getting an actual literal win worth of improvement over what you had before by picking up Barney. But GMs have to think long term in addition to short term, or they get fleeced, so even if you’re certain that Barney nets you an actual literal win, you have to think about the consequences of trading for him v. what you’re giving up.
So in some sense, the WIN = $5 million estimate may balance out when you look at the short term v. long-term needs. Dodgers may think right now, for this year in this trade, a single WIN is worth $6 and 2 would be worth $10M, but they also have to think about what they are doing to the team in buying a short-term solution.
joshQuote Reply
@ SVB:
Actually, yeah, that was kind of cool.
joshQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
That’s great, and I bet you carry it off well. I’m laughing now imaging being in the back of your class.
I tried something similar once but It didn’t work as well for me because I teach in my students’ second language, so on the first day of class they were still getting used to my accent, etc. and didn’t get the nuance.
SVBQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
Shit-hell. I got my masters at a little tiny liberal arts college just big enough to have 1-2 nominal masters’ programs. The English degree was geared toward English teachers in the local high school system. They didn’t have GAships or any kind of teaching help at all. They hired me as an adjunct after I graduated. I literally had zero teaching experience going into that. I had no idea what I was doing and failed miserably. It was horrible. I tried to get a teaching job at a community college here in Champaign and they were kind of horrified that I’d ever been allowed in front of students. I had no real counterargument to offer.
That’s why I sit in a cubicle drawing comics and writing science fiction stories instead of teaching.
joshQuote Reply
@ SVB:
So either you’re teaching forest conservation in Bolivia or somewhere, or you’re actually Bolivian. Are you a communist? Just answer the question. Also, post a list of your communist friends so we can “talk” to them.
’50s’d
joshQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
This.
But it’s amazing how many schools are now looking for people with active learning/service learning experience….
SVBQuote Reply
I guess the good thing about being an academic fuckup is that I get to stay married and drink decent coffee? I do drink some amazing coffee. Fucking spectacular.
joshQuote Reply
@ josh:
(dying laughing).
I teach in the USA. Does that help?
SVBQuote Reply
Mercurial Outfielder wrote:
bonus points if that typo was intentional
EnricoPallazzoQuote Reply
@ SVB:
It definitely helps if you can teach and your students actually care about learning.
In my experience it is rare to have both…but I felt that I had really good teachers when I was being edumacated. However, when I was the educator, the students weren’t as receptive. There were one or two who genuinely loved to learn but the rest were just counting the seconds until the bell rang.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
@ SVB:
Shit. Commies are in our borders now!! GET J. EDGAR ON THE PHONE!
joshQuote Reply
@ josh:
But you have to find me first….
SVBQuote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
Yeah, my first semester teaching was more of the students who cared about their writing, and the second semester was more of the “chatting during class” and giving me the “fucking die already” stares type of students.
joshQuote Reply
In other news, today my son drew a Dalek on his Magna Doodle.
Nerd begat nerd.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
Shit, man, I couldn’t believe that I was a student in literature class that was a piggy-back type class. In other words, I was the only grad student and the rest were undergrads, but they were all juniors and seniors and none of them read the books for the class. They would ask me for the answers before class. I told them to eat shit in not-so-many words. I couldn’t believe the lack of discipline. Junior and senior year, to me, was when classes finally started getting interesting.
joshQuote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
EXTERMINATE!
joshQuote Reply
By the way, how did Soler do?
Rice CubeQuote Reply
@ SVB:
The things I hear like this are what have made me reconsider grad school (dying laughing)
AkabariQuote Reply
@ josh:
Bolivia?
Sure, and that’s part of the calculation — for the team selling prospects, I assume that valuing them based again on some assumption of future marginal value is part of the deal. This year, I think that smart and forward-looking GMs (THoyer hopefully among them) are taking note of how much money is flowing into the league as well as changes to the CBA and coming to the conclusion that wins are set to get significantly more expensive over the next few years.
But I think you need to also price risk into the equation as well. You can put a value on a prospect who is in A ball, but that’s based on an aggregate future value that’s spread across the 250-odd graded prospects in all levels of the minors. The chances of getting actual value out of a guy at that level are significantly smaller than getting #2 starter value out of Ryan Dempster for the rest of this year, and you have to account for that. I think that’s part of the desire on the part of THoyer to bring in massive numbers of prospects…you have to have a lot of bodies if you’re going to be comfortable counting on any sort of production from your farm in the future.
Hopefully, the Dodgers are just gonna be dumb and overpay. I still think that both teams can come out ahead, though.
uncle daveQuote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
Never mind…BUST
http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/11951/soler-goes-hitless-in-debut
Rice CubeQuote Reply
@ uncle dave:
I think teams are more wary about overpaying at the trade deadline than they used to be, but it only takes one GM getting desperate.
joshQuote Reply
@ uncle dave:
The ’50s was certain communism would come from the least likely place.
Also, new comic: http://obstructedview.net/comics/temporary-fix.html
joshQuote Reply
On Zach Lee, I know he is 20, but this guy has a 5.53
BrendanQuote Reply
OOPS… He has a 5.53 ERA so far this year through 16 starts. Just doesn’t look like the can’t miss prospect that the Dodgers might value him as…
BrendanQuote Reply