Bleacher Bums Forum

Don't fetishize the prospects.  We lost Gallagher?  Draft another one next year.

I agree.  Gallagher is a decent prospect, but decent prospects are easily replaceable, each draft or each offseason.  But young, controllable potential stars are NOT easily replaceable, and shouldn't be traded away for short term benefit.

Except for the fact that he would be a fourth lefty starter, Valdez looks to be a perfect fit for the Cubs this offseason.

I would prefer Cease (for reasons of fit and otherwise) but would love either one.

I must say, Hoyer’s deep-seated caution is generally a negative, but this is one instance where I consider it a plus. This was not the occasion to overpay and go all-in, and I’m glad we didn’t beat the offers for the likes of Keller and Bednar. Maybe for Suarez and Jax those were packages we might have wanted to match. Based on what the mediocre crop of rental SP was going for we can only assume the cost for the controllable guys - none of whom is a true TORP except Ryan - was comically ridiculous.

With both Horton and Brown facing workload management and Horton a guy you probably want to start a playoff game, it would be great if the Cubs could find some ingenious way to alternate them in the rotation for stretches while still keeping them stretched out enough to be useful as starters. But that would be a pretty tough ask.

The Athletic just provided their take on "winners and losers" from the MLB trade deadline. You probably know which category they placed Cubs in.

Chicago Cubs

Sometimes when you snooze, you lose. No contender needs a great starter like the Cubs. There was plenty of smoke, but when the deadline came and went, there was no fire. The Cubs got three veteran pitchers — starter Michael Soroka and relievers Andrew Kittredge and Taylor Rogers — and utility player Willi Castro, a league-average hitter. That’s all. They declined to part with the top prospects that might have brought back a top-end starter. They also decided not to upgrade the lineup in their one (and only?) season with Kyle Tucker. The answer to their third-base question, apparently, is Matt Shaw staying hot. It was a surprisingly conservative approach in a crucial season.

Except for the fact that he would be a fourth lefty starter, Valdez looks to be a perfect fit for the Cubs this offseason.

No chance they'll spend the money it takes to get him. They need to save some money so they have the flexibility to make their big 2026 trade deadline move.

There is clearly an assumption on the board that Tucker will not be back. At least one person has concluded that the fact that Caisie was not traded essentially guarantees that. Not sure why, since I doubt that neither the Cubs nor Tucker yet know with certainty whether he will br back. It is very reasonable to believe it to be extremely likely that he will not be back. But I keep getting confused about the readiness with which some are ready to conclude, apparently with certainty, various conclusions about the future. Seems to me that much about the future in baseball is far from certain. For example, I don't think anyone expected that at this point in the season the only team in MLB with a better record than the Cubs would be the Brewers.

Apparently, Willi Castro is batting 1,000 this season.

Another take on how Jed being Jed is a blessing and a curse.

Key sentence from this piece:

“What Hoyer needed to do at this deadline was become just a little irrational.”

NO!  Being a little stupid is not a prescription for success.