Gleybor

knoxville7

2020 CCS Fantasy Football Champion(Yahoo League)
7,678
3,912
70
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Tennessee Volunteers
For those that continually complain about trading him away for Chapman...

how do you feel now that he’s got 3 total homers between last year and this year?

not that any of you should bitch about it anyways, seeing as how we got a ring by making that move
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
11,413
3,385
75
If there's a trade to be upset about, it's not Torres.

It's the one that happened a year later that involved Eloy and Cease.
I have the completely opposite take tbh. I mean sure the Q trade didn't pan out the way you would hope but I much rather get 4 years of a pitcher who at the time of the trade looked to be very quality than a half year rental on a reliever. I'm not interested in dredging up a debate about the efficacy of Chapman when it comes to the 2016 title. Suffice to say I agree they needed relief pitching. I disagree that Chapman was the only way to do it.

As this pertains to the topic at hand... I mean people can bring up what Torres is currently but I don't think that's particularly relevant. The case against giving him up isn't because the cubs were going to keep him long term. The case for not making the Chapman trade is Torres probably would have been used to acquire starting pitching instead if he wasn't part of the Chapman trade. And given how the cubs played post 2016, having the ability to go after better pitching than Q would have been interesting. Like as an example, IDK that it would happen in division but with Eloy and Torres the cubs would have had the prospects to go after Cole when the pirates traded him. And if the cubs did that, maybe they have $20+ mil AAV that they wouldn't have spent on Darvish to go after a better bat.

Regardless, the cubs undoubtably ran out of prospect gas post 2016. At best the won short term but hurt themselves longer term. I'm not going to argue if people think it was still worth it but I also feel like a strong contingent of people would then also say the teams post-2016 should have been better. When you weaken yourself to win now that's gonna happen.
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
7,466
4,532
70
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
I have the completely opposite take tbh. I mean sure the Q trade didn't pan out the way you would hope but I much rather get 4 years of a pitcher who at the time of the trade looked to be very quality than a half year rental on a reliever. I'm not interested in dredging up a debate about the efficacy of Chapman when it comes to the 2016 title. Suffice to say I agree they needed relief pitching. I disagree that Chapman was the only way to do it.

As this pertains to the topic at hand... I mean people can bring up what Torres is currently but I don't think that's particularly relevant. The case against giving him up isn't because the cubs were going to keep him long term. The case for not making the Chapman trade is Torres probably would have been used to acquire starting pitching instead if he wasn't part of the Chapman trade. And given how the cubs played post 2016, having the ability to go after better pitching than Q would have been interesting. Like as an example, IDK that it would happen in division but with Eloy and Torres the cubs would have had the prospects to go after Cole when the pirates traded him. And if the cubs did that, maybe they have $20+ mil AAV that they wouldn't have spent on Darvish to go after a better bat.

Regardless, the cubs undoubtably ran out of prospect gas post 2016. At best the won short term but hurt themselves longer term. I'm not going to argue if people think it was still worth it but I also feel like a strong contingent of people would then also say the teams post-2016 should have been better. When you weaken yourself to win now that's gonna happen.
Some of your overly lengthy posts are as enlightening as post nasal drip. The cold hard fact is that with Chapman the Cubs ended the longest losing drought in pro sports history. There is no changing that, no guarantee...NONE...that had it played out any other way, the Cubs would have still won that year. Your hypotheticals are laughable.,..as any long time Cub fan, after all we had seen over the years will tell you. It was the right move....a winning move.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
11,413
3,385
75
Some of your overly lengthy posts are as enlightening as post nasal drip. The cold hard fact is that with Chapman the Cubs ended the longest losing drought in pro sports history. There is no changing that, no guarantee...NONE...that had it played out any other way, the Cubs would have still won that year. Your hypotheticals are laughable.,..as any long time Cub fan, after all we had seen over the years will tell you. It was the right move....a winning move.
And Cleveland made an almost identical trade for Miller and it netted them nothing. The fact of the matter is it was a gamble. It payed off but there was no guarantee it would have. MLB history is full of teams making this exact win now move for relievers and having it blow up in the teams face.

My opinion is that making those types of trades are poor choices. Value is what the Yankees did prior to the 2016 season where they capitalized on Cincy wanting to sell low on Chapman. My issue isn't that the cubs went after a reliever... it's that they went into the season with the issue to begin with and then had to buy their way out of the problem which undoubtedly cost them long term. Let's not forget they also had to trade for Monty because they had nothing in their pen. Waiting until july to address that sort of problem was always going to cost them more.
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
7,466
4,532
70
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Oh, I see. It's bad "value" to trade for a guy that was a prime factor in winning a World Series.....BUT....it's great value to gut what's left of your system to get a pitcher that was brutal. Don't give me any of the dumbass metrics backing up your case....I mean that's pretty much all you rely on, isn't it? Try watching the player pitch on a regular basis. My brother is a huge Sox fan and before one pitch was thrown or swung at after that trade, he informed that we got sold down the river by Theo. He told me he watched every game that Q pitched for the Sox and that he was a born loser. His control was shaky, relying on bad umpires and undisciplined hitters to get outs.....in other words, more lucky than good. Sure he was famous for not getting much support but I was informed when the Sox did get him some runs....he'd go belly up walking guys and not getting past the 4th inning. He also told me that every single one of his White Sox buddies were glad to be rid of him and elated at what Hahn got for him. I'm guessing you didn't see much of Q with the Sox, did you? Maybe some highlights on ESPN? Call me old fashioned but I'll take the eye test every day of the week. That's the big difference on these two trades....Chapman you scouted and faced for years with Cincy and you saw and knew exactly what you were getting.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
11,413
3,385
75
Oh, I see. It's bad "value" to trade for a guy that was a prime factor in winning a World Series.....BUT....it's great value to gut what's left of your system to get a pitcher that was brutal. Don't give me any of the dumbass metrics backing up your case....I mean that's pretty much all you rely on, isn't it? Try watching the player pitch on a regular basis. My brother is a huge Sox fan and before one pitch was thrown or swung at after that trade, he informed that we got sold down the river by Theo. He told me he watched every game that Q pitched for the Sox and that he was a born loser. His control was shaky, relying on bad umpires and undisciplined hitters to get outs.....in other words, more lucky than good. Sure he was famous for not getting much support but I was informed when the Sox did get him some runs....he'd go belly up walking guys and not getting past the 4th inning. He also told me that every single one of his White Sox buddies were glad to be rid of him and elated at what Hahn got for him. I'm guessing you didn't see much of Q with the Sox, did you? Maybe some highlights on ESPN? Call me old fashioned but I'll take the eye test every day of the week. That's the big difference on these two trades....Chapman you scouted and faced for years with Cincy and you saw and knew exactly what you were getting.
If you don't like Q then whatever. Like I'm not even arguing the players I'm arguing the concept. Trading for a player with 4 years of control vs trading for a player with half a year. Clearly you want to make the case that Chapman was so instrumental in winning the world series that it was worth it. I'm arguing that the cubs put themselves into that hole by not addressing a big weakness prior to the season. Go back and look at what they started that season with. You had Rondon and Strop and who exactly? Like Edwards was fine as an interesting arm but he was super young and unproven. They were counting on Travis Wood Justin Grimm and Cahill. Are we really surprised when Rondon and Strop get hurt that suddenly there's a panic to find more relief help? Hell, Rondon was good but if we're talking playoff baseball which the team should have had eyes towards given 2015, I'd much rather Strop in the 7th, Rondon in the 8th and a better closer to start 2016.

If they'd gone after Chapman in December when no one wanted to touch him like the Yankees did I wouldn't have nearly as much of an issue with trading for him. My thing is people pin all of the logic on "well they won".... yeah in the 10th inning of game 7 of the world series after chapman had blown the save. That's not even shitting on Chapman because clearly he was gassed by joe the previous couple of games. My point is that if the coin flip bounced slightly the other way in extra innings of game 7 and the cubs lose that game then what? Then you are cleveland who hasn't won in decades either and you just gave up one of your biggest trade chips for nothing.

If you contrast the Chapman trade with the Monty trade I think it illustrates my point. I actually like the Monty trade. It fulfilled the same idea as what they did with Chapman but Monty gave them several years of quality pitching. So had that game 7 gone differently then at the very least the cubs extract some value out of the trade in future years.

In a sport where the best teams in baseball lose 40% of the time, I'm never going to be comfortable with trades that bet that way. For every Chapman there are dozens of Heathcliff Slocomb for Derek Lowe and Jason Varitek. There's Larry Anderson's for Jeff Bagwell's....etc. And the irony is that if the cubs had done more prior to 2016 to address their bullpen and had Torres in 2017, then they almost certainly would have had the ammo to grab any truly available starter on the market. So they probably would have set their sights higher than Q who looked like more of a #2 or #3 at the time rather than being a true ace.
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
7,466
4,532
70
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Please.......you are adjusting the narrative to fit your argument. Before the season started nearly everyone thought the Cubs were still a year away. Their catching situation was bad with Montero as top guy who couldn't stay healthy and when he could, couldn't throw you or me out at 2B. Contreras didn't make his showing till late June or so. Schwarber was out for the seaon or so everyone thought since April.....they had Soler, another guy who couldn't stay healthy or play D playing in the outfield. They found out that while Heyward was a fine addition on defense and in the clubhouse....he couldn't hit. The team was kind of a mess but somehow they just kept winning and Theo decided to roll the dice and bring in a rental. He wasn't thinking for one second about the future, wasn't thinking about player "control"....it was about right then and there and 108 years of frustration.

And finally, if you would've taken the time to watch Q actually pitch instead having your nose buried in sabermetrics....you would've known he wasn't who everyone was saying he was. To be honest, I didn't see many of his games either but my brother is a crazy fan who loves his team and players.....and if he said one of his guys is a loser, I tend to believe him.

You know what?

He was right.....So please tell me again why team control over a bad player is such a good thing.
 

knoxville7

2020 CCS Fantasy Football Champion(Yahoo League)
7,678
3,912
70
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Tennessee Volunteers
Side note...Chapman has a 21 K’s per 9 innings so far this year. That’s absolutely fucking insane
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
11,413
3,385
75
Please.......you are adjusting the narrative to fit your argument. Before the season started nearly everyone thought the Cubs were still a year away. Their catching situation was bad with Montero as top guy who couldn't stay healthy and when he could, couldn't throw you or me out at 2B. Contreras didn't make his showing till late June or so. Schwarber was out for the seaon or so everyone thought since April.....they had Soler, another guy who couldn't stay healthy or play D playing in the outfield. They found out that while Heyward was a fine addition on defense and in the clubhouse....he couldn't hit. The team was kind of a mess but somehow they just kept winning and Theo decided to roll the dice and bring in a rental. He wasn't thinking for one second about the future, wasn't thinking about player "control"....it was about right then and there and 108 years of frustration.

And finally, if you would've taken the time to watch Q actually pitch instead having your nose buried in sabermetrics....you would've known he wasn't who everyone was saying he was. To be honest, I didn't see many of his games either but my brother is a crazy fan who loves his team and players.....and if he said one of his guys is a loser, I tend to believe him.

You know what?

He was right.....So please tell me again why team control over a bad player is such a good thing.
Changing the narrative? You're turning this into a debate about the quality of Q which I have literally never argued for in this post. As for the comments about being a year away... they went to the 2015 NLCS. They added Heyward and Zobrist because they thought they were ready but didn't touch the bullpen and payed for it.

End of the day we don't agree which.... fine. I'm not particularly interested in continuing this debate when you're being condescending. Last thing I will say on this subject is the narrative is totally different if the cubs don't come back and win extras. Chapman would be viewed as a giant goat and people would murder theo for making the trade.
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
7,466
4,532
70
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Changing the narrative? You're turning this into a debate about the quality of Q which I have literally never argued for in this post. As for the comments about being a year away... they went to the 2015 NLCS. They added Heyward and Zobrist because they thought they were ready but didn't touch the bullpen and payed for it.

End of the day we don't agree which.... fine. I'm not particularly interested in continuing this debate when you're being condescending. Last thing I will say on this subject is the narrative is totally different if the cubs don't come back and win extras. Chapman would be viewed as a giant goat and people would murder theo for making the trade.
But he wasn't.....Cubs win a World Series for the first time in literally millions of fans lives. End of story.....
 

Bust

Well-known member
1,666
1,021
70
Could not agree more. 108 fucking years and people are pissed because Theo traded a young guy to get the pitcher that pretty much sealed the deal. We live in a world of morons.
Yet in the same breath even after 3 cups in the Blackhawks forum you still crying like a little bitch there tho...lol
 
Last edited:

TL1961

Well-known member
25,721
12,558
105
For those that continually complain about trading him away for Chapman...

how do you feel now that he’s got 3 total homers between last year and this year?

not that any of you should bitch about it anyways, seeing as how we got a ring by making that move
I never complained about that trade and never will.

But “between last (short, screwed up) year and this year” (in early May) means little. And HRs aren’t the only thing that matters.

But, yeah, I prefer the trophy.
 

knoxville7

2020 CCS Fantasy Football Champion(Yahoo League)
7,678
3,912
70
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Tennessee Volunteers
I never complained about that trade and never will.

But “between last (short, screwed up) year and this year” (in early May) means little. And HRs aren’t the only thing that matters.

But, yeah, I prefer the trophy.

it’s 280 plate appearances, so while small, it’s almost half of a full season of baseball. and true homers aren’t everything, and Torres has atrocious numbers everywhere in that time period...not just homers.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
15,130
2,320
85
The trade in itself sucked. But situationally best trade that the Cubs have made.

Q trade on paper looked good.

Q trade in reality worst trade of all time.

It is not about the trade. That is a gamble. One won. One lost.

The real problem is Theo offloaded the #1 ranked farm system. If he would have held onto Cease and Eloy. Well Eloy would have pushed Schwarber out. Joc would have never been signed. Cease would be with Alozay and Hendricks. They might have retained Yu then and let Mills absorb innings until Marquez was ready.

The way it could have been would have been better than what it is in this case. The Cubs didn't score another ring with that trade. Remove that trade and this Trainwreck might not have happened.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
11,413
3,385
75
Well Eloy would have pushed Schwarber out. Joc would have never been signed. Cease would be with Alozay and Hendricks. They might have retained Yu then and let Mills absorb innings until Marquez was ready.
Doubtful in my eyes. Eloy is a terrible defender. We're talking-7.3 UZR/150 in LF over 1400 innings. Schwarber for all the hand wringing about his defense was a +5 over 3800 innings. So, Eloy is almost certainly going to be a DH pretty quickly. If the Q trade never happens he would have been traded for something else.

As for Cease... I mean he's still got the same pros/cons he had at the time of the trade. He has electric stuff but can't command it. A 4.68 bb/9 over 161 IP in the majors really hampers his potential. For reference here, Tyler Chatwood is a 4.67 bb/9 guy.... and we all so how that played out. The sox by all means should try to let him work that out but if he doesn't long term I can't see him being a starter. Maybe the cubs wouldn't have traded him knowing what they do now but both he and Eloy had flaws the cubs knew better than anyone. That's why they were dealt.

Torres also had flaws. I imagine they pictured him more as a 2B especially when you have 2 superb defenders in Baez/Russell at that time. Maybe the cubs don't win the 2016 title if he isn't traded. But I have to believe if the cubs still had Torres in 2017 they would have got Verlander instead of Q. If you recall Verlander wanted to go to the cubs but the cubs felt the price was too steep. And assuming they didn't win in 2016 you have to imagine they'd be pulling out stops to win in 2017. What happens then? Who's to say? Seems unlikely they would be as desperate to sign Chatwood/Darvish if they had verlander though. Verlander/Lester/Hendricks would have been a pretty solid 1-3.
 

Top