Javier Baez 2014 ROY-MVP-World Series MVP Thread

[Saul Goodman]

Lots of talk about moving Javy for pitching or is he gonna start and what not.

Am I nuts for thinking, they should definitely keep him as a super utility guy? He's not entitled to any full time starting role but his stint at the end of the year proved he's got a lot of value as a fill in guy and he'd be more than acceptable should Castro, Russell, or Bryant get hurt at any point.

Seems like it'd be pretty dumb to get rid of a guy like that.

I agree. As these guys get older and more experienced, they might be more inclined to bitch about consistent roles and/or batting order spots, but while their still young, why not hang on to a guy who can back up at three positions with ease and could probably be a capable OF too.

Every year it seems like there is some team that is over-loaded at some position and trades away some of that depth in spring training, then ends up signing Felix Doubront to fill out their rotation.

It all just depends on what Baez's trade value is. If he can actually help bring back a young, talented arm (a Tyson Ross or Carlos Carrasco type), that's a far better use of his value than keeping him around for depth purposes.

DPD, but this. I like Javy and would be excited about him entering spring training as the starter at 2B or whatever if they move Castro but if some team is willing to trade a TOR starter and they want Baez instead of Castro then I'm not saying no. That's worth more to them than a valuable backup.

Baez as depth would be a luxury that few teams could afford. It would be crazy to have Hammel start a playoff game with Baez waiting to pinch hit.

I mean my preference is they sign David Price and we get to keep all our lovely toys. I am willing to accept that maybe they don't want 350+ million tied up in two aging arms, though, and that they may want to try and trade for a young, quality starting pitcher like Ross or Corrasco.

My first offer in that package wouldn't be Baez and I'm sure it won't be Jepstink's either. I'm sure they'll offer Gleyber and every other minor leaguer they've got and maybe Castro before they put Javy on the table, but if we're looking at Javy on the bench and a back of the rotation of Hendricks/Hammel and some second or third tier FA pitcher vs. trading Javy to get Ross or another #1/2 starter then there's no question you should move Javy.

I'm a little bewildered that something like this has to be explained around here in this much detail.

It's kind of his thing.

[Bort]

Lots of talk about moving Javy for pitching or is he gonna start and what not.

Am I nuts for thinking, they should definitely keep him as a super utility guy? He's not entitled to any full time starting role but his stint at the end of the year proved he's got a lot of value as a fill in guy and he'd be more than acceptable should Castro, Russell, or Bryant get hurt at any point.

Seems like it'd be pretty dumb to get rid of a guy like that.

I agree. As these guys get older and more experienced, they might be more inclined to bitch about consistent roles and/or batting order spots, but while their still young, why not hang on to a guy who can back up at three positions with ease and could probably be a capable OF too.

Every year it seems like there is some team that is over-loaded at some position and trades away some of that depth in spring training, then ends up signing Felix Doubront to fill out their rotation.

It all just depends on what Baez's trade value is. If he can actually help bring back a young, talented arm (a Tyson Ross or Carlos Carrasco type), that's a far better use of his value than keeping him around for depth purposes.

DPD, but this. I like Javy and would be excited about him entering spring training as the starter at 2B or whatever if they move Castro but if some team is willing to trade a TOR starter and they want Baez instead of Castro then I'm not saying no. That's worth more to them than a valuable backup.

Baez as depth would be a luxury that few teams could afford. It would be crazy to have Hammel start a playoff game with Baez waiting to pinch hit.

I mean my preference is they sign David Price and we get to keep all our lovely toys. I am willing to accept that maybe they don't want 350+ million tied up in two aging arms, though, and that they may want to try and trade for a young, quality starting pitcher like Ross or Corrasco.

My first offer in that package wouldn't be Baez and I'm sure it won't be Jepstink's either. I'm sure they'll offer Gleyber and every other minor leaguer they've got and maybe Castro before they put Javy on the table, but if we're looking at Javy on the bench and a back of the rotation of Hendricks/Hammel and some second or third tier FA pitcher vs. trading Javy to get Ross or another #1/2 starter then there's no question you should move Javy.

I'm a little bewildered that something like this has to be explained around here in this much detail.

It's kind of his thing.

Do you mean SKO over-explaining or Fork Forking?

[SKO]

Lots of talk about moving Javy for pitching or is he gonna start and what not.

Am I nuts for thinking, they should definitely keep him as a super utility guy? He's not entitled to any full time starting role but his stint at the end of the year proved he's got a lot of value as a fill in guy and he'd be more than acceptable should Castro, Russell, or Bryant get hurt at any point.

Seems like it'd be pretty dumb to get rid of a guy like that.

I agree. As these guys get older and more experienced, they might be more inclined to bitch about consistent roles and/or batting order spots, but while their still young, why not hang on to a guy who can back up at three positions with ease and could probably be a capable OF too.

Every year it seems like there is some team that is over-loaded at some position and trades away some of that depth in spring training, then ends up signing Felix Doubront to fill out their rotation.

It all just depends on what Baez's trade value is. If he can actually help bring back a young, talented arm (a Tyson Ross or Carlos Carrasco type), that's a far better use of his value than keeping him around for depth purposes.

DPD, but this. I like Javy and would be excited about him entering spring training as the starter at 2B or whatever if they move Castro but if some team is willing to trade a TOR starter and they want Baez instead of Castro then I'm not saying no. That's worth more to them than a valuable backup.

Baez as depth would be a luxury that few teams could afford. It would be crazy to have Hammel start a playoff game with Baez waiting to pinch hit.

I mean my preference is they sign David Price and we get to keep all our lovely toys. I am willing to accept that maybe they don't want 350+ million tied up in two aging arms, though, and that they may want to try and trade for a young, quality starting pitcher like Ross or Corrasco.

My first offer in that package wouldn't be Baez and I'm sure it won't be Jepstink's either. I'm sure they'll offer Gleyber and every other minor leaguer they've got and maybe Castro before they put Javy on the table, but if we're looking at Javy on the bench and a back of the rotation of Hendricks/Hammel and some second or third tier FA pitcher vs. trading Javy to get Ross or another #1/2 starter then there's no question you should move Javy.

I'm a little bewildered that something like this has to be explained around here in this much detail.

It's kind of his thing.

Do you mean SKO over-explaining or Fork Forking?

Probably both and he's not wrong. I should learn to not respond to Fork's "every prospect is unbeliveably awesome and the Cubs have more money than God and they'll just perpetually add whoever they want while losing nobody and we all need to get fitted for our extra medium championship tees now" act, but I mean, it took me five years to stop responding to Cutler trolls. I'm a slow learner.

[Quality Start Machine]

Lots of talk about moving Javy for pitching or is he gonna start and what not.

Am I nuts for thinking, they should definitely keep him as a super utility guy? He's not entitled to any full time starting role but his stint at the end of the year proved he's got a lot of value as a fill in guy and he'd be more than acceptable should Castro, Russell, or Bryant get hurt at any point.

Seems like it'd be pretty dumb to get rid of a guy like that.

I agree. As these guys get older and more experienced, they might be more inclined to bitch about consistent roles and/or batting order spots, but while their still young, why not hang on to a guy who can back up at three positions with ease and could probably be a capable OF too.

Every year it seems like there is some team that is over-loaded at some position and trades away some of that depth in spring training, then ends up signing Felix Doubront to fill out their rotation.

It all just depends on what Baez's trade value is. If he can actually help bring back a young, talented arm (a Tyson Ross or Carlos Carrasco type), that's a far better use of his value than keeping him around for depth purposes.

DPD, but this. I like Javy and would be excited about him entering spring training as the starter at 2B or whatever if they move Castro but if some team is willing to trade a TOR starter and they want Baez instead of Castro then I'm not saying no. That's worth more to them than a valuable backup.

Baez as depth would be a luxury that few teams could afford. It would be crazy to have Hammel start a playoff game with Baez waiting to pinch hit.

One thousand times this. At some point every GM has to give something up to improve their team. There are a finite number of great players, and most people who have one under control aren't going to give them up without something worth gaining in return.

But for now, the thing the Cubs have they can give up most easily is money.

Okay but what if they don't have the money you think they have or the willingness to spend it you think they do? What if they want to spend it on Jason Heyward and not on a 31 year old who might be totally useless by the last 3-4 years of their deal when they're probably already expecting the last few years of Lester's contract to be a bit of a drag? Do you deny they'd need to trade for starting pitching in that scenario or just consider starting pitching less useful than Javier Baez doing a Ben Zobrist impersonation?

Of course not. I fully expect the Cubs to explore every avenue to fill the needs the have, and use every tool at their disposal to do it. But as has been pointed out here and in other places, the Cubs are, what, 3 years from having the ability to launch their own broadcast channel/network? So any pain point from paying fossils 25 mildo/per/each would be more easily absorbed at that point. So as things stand now and in the future, using money instead of sending players is less of a pain point.

As far as the Ricketts family's money and willingness to spend? After the cheddar they threw at Lester, and the success they had this season with both ticket and broadcast/advertising revenue? I'd say the purse strings are probably pretty damn loose.

[SKO]

Lots of talk about moving Javy for pitching or is he gonna start and what not.

Am I nuts for thinking, they should definitely keep him as a super utility guy? He's not entitled to any full time starting role but his stint at the end of the year proved he's got a lot of value as a fill in guy and he'd be more than acceptable should Castro, Russell, or Bryant get hurt at any point.

Seems like it'd be pretty dumb to get rid of a guy like that.

I agree. As these guys get older and more experienced, they might be more inclined to bitch about consistent roles and/or batting order spots, but while their still young, why not hang on to a guy who can back up at three positions with ease and could probably be a capable OF too.

Every year it seems like there is some team that is over-loaded at some position and trades away some of that depth in spring training, then ends up signing Felix Doubront to fill out their rotation.

It all just depends on what Baez's trade value is. If he can actually help bring back a young, talented arm (a Tyson Ross or Carlos Carrasco type), that's a far better use of his value than keeping him around for depth purposes.

DPD, but this. I like Javy and would be excited about him entering spring training as the starter at 2B or whatever if they move Castro but if some team is willing to trade a TOR starter and they want Baez instead of Castro then I'm not saying no. That's worth more to them than a valuable backup.

Baez as depth would be a luxury that few teams could afford. It would be crazy to have Hammel start a playoff game with Baez waiting to pinch hit.

One thousand times this. At some point every GM has to give something up to improve their team. There are a finite number of great players, and most people who have one under control aren't going to give them up without something worth gaining in return.

But for now, the thing the Cubs have they can give up most easily is money.

Okay but what if they don't have the money you think they have or the willingness to spend it you think they do? What if they want to spend it on Jason Heyward and not on a 31 year old who might be totally useless by the last 3-4 years of their deal when they're probably already expecting the last few years of Lester's contract to be a bit of a drag? Do you deny they'd need to trade for starting pitching in that scenario or just consider starting pitching less useful than Javier Baez doing a Ben Zobrist impersonation?

Of course not. I fully expect the Cubs to explore every avenue to fill the needs the have, and use every tool at their disposal to do it. But as has been pointed out here and in other places, the Cubs are, what, 3 years from having the ability to launch their own broadcast channel/network? So any pain point from paying fossils 25 mildo/per/each would be more easily absorbed at that point. So as things stand now and in the future, using money instead of sending players is less of a pain point.

As far as the Ricketts family's money and willingness to spend? After the cheddar they threw at Lester, and the success they had this season with both ticket and broadcast/advertising revenue? I'd say the purse strings are probably pretty damn loose.

There is a reason that Jon Lester isn't a Dodger. There's a reason Zack Greinke may not be a Dodger next year. Even teams with seemingly limitless finances will sometimes balk at making a potentially bad investment. You have no realistic idea what Ricketts is willing to spend this offseason. All anyone is asking is that you consider that he might not be willing to pay what you think he is willing to pay, and if so, trading Baez for pitching makes a lot of goddamn sense.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

How many days until Opening Day again?

[Quality Start Machine]

Lots of talk about moving Javy for pitching or is he gonna start and what not.

Am I nuts for thinking, they should definitely keep him as a super utility guy? He's not entitled to any full time starting role but his stint at the end of the year proved he's got a lot of value as a fill in guy and he'd be more than acceptable should Castro, Russell, or Bryant get hurt at any point.

Seems like it'd be pretty dumb to get rid of a guy like that.

I agree. As these guys get older and more experienced, they might be more inclined to bitch about consistent roles and/or batting order spots, but while their still young, why not hang on to a guy who can back up at three positions with ease and could probably be a capable OF too.

Every year it seems like there is some team that is over-loaded at some position and trades away some of that depth in spring training, then ends up signing Felix Doubront to fill out their rotation.

It all just depends on what Baez's trade value is. If he can actually help bring back a young, talented arm (a Tyson Ross or Carlos Carrasco type), that's a far better use of his value than keeping him around for depth purposes.

DPD, but this. I like Javy and would be excited about him entering spring training as the starter at 2B or whatever if they move Castro but if some team is willing to trade a TOR starter and they want Baez instead of Castro then I'm not saying no. That's worth more to them than a valuable backup.

Baez as depth would be a luxury that few teams could afford. It would be crazy to have Hammel start a playoff game with Baez waiting to pinch hit.

One thousand times this. At some point every GM has to give something up to improve their team. There are a finite number of great players, and most people who have one under control aren't going to give them up without something worth gaining in return.

But for now, the thing the Cubs have they can give up most easily is money.

Okay but what if they don't have the money you think they have or the willingness to spend it you think they do? What if they want to spend it on Jason Heyward and not on a 31 year old who might be totally useless by the last 3-4 years of their deal when they're probably already expecting the last few years of Lester's contract to be a bit of a drag? Do you deny they'd need to trade for starting pitching in that scenario or just consider starting pitching less useful than Javier Baez doing a Ben Zobrist impersonation?

Of course not. I fully expect the Cubs to explore every avenue to fill the needs the have, and use every tool at their disposal to do it. But as has been pointed out here and in other places, the Cubs are, what, 3 years from having the ability to launch their own broadcast channel/network? So any pain point from paying fossils 25 mildo/per/each would be more easily absorbed at that point. So as things stand now and in the future, using money instead of sending players is less of a pain point.

As far as the Ricketts family's money and willingness to spend? After the cheddar they threw at Lester, and the success they had this season with both ticket and broadcast/advertising revenue? I'd say the purse strings are probably pretty damn loose.

There is a reason that Jon Lester isn't a Dodger. There's a reason Zack Greinke may not be a Dodger next year. Even teams with seemingly limitless finances will sometimes balk at making a potentially bad investment. You have no realistic idea what Ricketts is willing to spend this offseason. All anyone is asking is that you consider that he might not be willing to pay what you think he is willing to pay, and if so, trading Baez for pitching makes a lot of goddamn sense.

What part of "I fully expect the Cubs to explore every avenue to fill the needs the have, and use every tool at their disposal to do it." is so difficult to comprehend?

[SKO]

What part of "I fully expect the Cubs to explore every avenue to fill the needs the have, and use every tool at their disposal to do it." is so difficult to comprehend?

The part where you immediately undercut it by balking at every trade proposed by anyone in the last two years.

[R-V]

How many days until Opening Day again?

I younger this thread might be tough sledding until some actual transactions occur.

[Oleg]

How many days until Opening Day again?

I younger this thread might be tough sledding until some actual transactions occur.

Shit...we're still a month away from the winter meetings.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

How many days until Opening Day again?

I younger this thread might be tough sledding until some actual transactions occur.

If that's how younger about it, I agree!

[Quality Start Machine]

What part of "I fully expect the Cubs to explore every avenue to fill the needs the have, and use every tool at their disposal to do it." is so difficult to comprehend?

The part where you immediately undercut it by balking at every trade proposed by anyone in the last two years.

How is saying "here is the most painless way of doing it" the same as "this is the only way it should be done"? You must be a fucking blast in meetings.

[SKO]

What part of "I fully expect the Cubs to explore every avenue to fill the needs the have, and use every tool at their disposal to do it." is so difficult to comprehend?

The part where you immediately undercut it by balking at every trade proposed by anyone in the last two years.

How is saying "here is the most painless way of doing it" the same as "this is the only way it should be done"? You must be a fucking blast in meetings.

Because your response is basically no longer required when it comes to any trade discussion on the board. We all know you'd rather they just buy players in free agency. Cool. Awesome. Thanks for playing. I'm sure people look forward to you in meetings. I assume it's just slide after slide of the same point, followed by pictures of BC, and that's if you leave time for it after spending the first half of the meeting asking everyone to pull your finger.

[Oleg]

What part of "I fully expect the Cubs to explore every avenue to fill the needs the have, and use every tool at their disposal to do it." is so difficult to comprehend?

The part where you immediately undercut it by balking at every trade proposed by anyone in the last two years.

How is saying "here is the most painless way of doing it" the same as "this is the only way it should be done"? You must be a fucking blast in meetings.

Because your response is basically no longer required when it comes to any trade discussion on the board. We all know you'd rather they just buy players in free agency. Cool. Awesome. Thanks for playing. I'm sure people look forward to you in meetings. I assume it's just slide after slide of the same point, followed by pictures of BC, and that's if you leave time for it after spending the first half of the meeting asking everyone to pull your finger.

I should learn to not respond to Fork's "every prospect is unbeliveably awesome and the Cubs have more money than God and they'll just perpetually add whoever they want while losing nobody and we all need to get fitted for our extra medium championship tees now" act, but I mean, it took me five years to stop responding to Cutler trolls. I'm a slow learner.

[Quality Start Machine]

What part of "I fully expect the Cubs to explore every avenue to fill the needs the have, and use every tool at their disposal to do it." is so difficult to comprehend?

The part where you immediately undercut it by balking at every trade proposed by anyone in the last two years.

How is saying "here is the most painless way of doing it" the same as "this is the only way it should be done"? You must be a fucking blast in meetings.

Because your response is basically no longer required when it comes to any trade discussion on the board. We all know you'd rather they just buy players in free agency. Cool. Awesome. Thanks for playing. I'm sure people look forward to you in meetings. I assume it's just slide after slide of the same point, followed by pictures of BC, and that's if you leave time for it after spending the first half of the meeting asking everyone to pull your finger.

You left out the 10 minutes of me offering everyone Hertz Donuts.