The Starlin Castro Farewell Tour?

[Chuck to Chuck]

Seriously though, Castro is making less than 7 million next year. That should in no way inhibit the Cubs from making whatever FA moves they want to make, so if the only options are DFA'ing him, or taking on an even worse contract just to get rid of him, why do it? He's worth a 7 million dollar gamble that he'll bounce back somewhat next year.

Not really seeing how he can bounce back.. Hard to see him getting playing time.  And his replacement is probably Baez at under $1mm/yr through 2018.  He costs nothing to replace.  The issue is can you get any value for him.  Something like a Shields swap is probably the only alternative outside of DFA/trade eating 90% of the salary.

Then again, maybe he has s little value that the DFA is the way to go.

[Eli]

If Castro truly has no trade value, then just keep him and let him play the Jonathan Herrera role next year. Maybe that's too awkward of a possibility and they'd rather just start clean, but I don't see them just dumping him entirely without getting back some kind of value.

[SKO]

Seriously though, Castro is making less than 7 million next year. That should in no way inhibit the Cubs from making whatever FA moves they want to make, so if the only options are DFA'ing him, or taking on an even worse contract just to get rid of him, why do it? He's worth a 7 million dollar gamble that he'll bounce back somewhat next year.

Not really seeing how he can bounce back.. Hard to see him getting playing time.  And his replacement is probably Baez at under $1mm/yr through 2018.  He costs nothing to replace.  The issue is can you get any value for him.  Something like a Shields swap is probably the only alternative outside of DFA/trade eating 90% of the salary.

Then again, maybe he has s little value that the DFA is the way to go.

Then you DFA him. Taking on a more expensive player you're going to regret having on the roster in a year or two, if that, is beyond dumb. And again, Kyle Hendricks (2.2 fWAR) has been literally twice as valuable a pitcher than James Shields (1.1) this year, and he costs basically nothing. Taking on Shields just to get rid of Castro, and having the acquisition of Shields either bump Hendricks from the rotation or preclude you from going after Price is invincibly stupid.

[Tonker]

If Castro truly has no trade value, then just keep him and let him play the Jonathan Herrera role next year. Maybe that's too awkward of a possibility and they'd rather just start clean, but I don't see them just dumping him entirely without getting back some kind of value.

Fortunately, there are definitely a few GMs in baseball who will look at Castro's age and history and reckon he's worth something.  I think the Cubs will be able to trade him, and not get completely arseraped, either.

[Quality Start Machine]

He's a 25 year old shortstop one year removed from being an all-star, with a team-friendly contract.

Wherever the convo travels from here, the "he doesn't have any trade value" part of it needs to be removed.

[Chuck to Chuck]

If Castro truly has no trade value, then just keep him and let him play the Jonathan Herrera role next year. Maybe that's too awkward of a possibility and they'd rather just start clean, but I don't see them just dumping him entirely without getting back some kind of value.

Fortunately, there are definitely a few GMs in baseball who will look at Castro's age and history and reckon he's worth something.  I think the Cubs will be able to trade him, and not get completely arseraped, either.

That's definitely possible. I think they can get rid of him for only a few hemorrhoids.

Also, a Shields type acquisition wouldn't replace Hendricks, it would replace Haren.  Adding Price next year would replace Hammel.  Hendricks at $510k isn't going anywhere. He makes Price possible.

[SKO]

If Castro truly has no trade value, then just keep him and let him play the Jonathan Herrera role next year. Maybe that's too awkward of a possibility and they'd rather just start clean, but I don't see them just dumping him entirely without getting back some kind of value.

Fortunately, there are definitely a few GMs in baseball who will look at Castro's age and history and reckon he's worth something.  I think the Cubs will be able to trade him, and not get completely arseraped, either.

They may have to package him with something attractive like Billy McKinney or even Gleyber, but I suspect it will be to get something they actually need in return. Not a flyball pitcher with declining velocity who hasn't even been able to hide in Petco Park this year.

[Chuck to Chuck]

He's a 25 year old shortstop one year removed from being an all-star, with a team-friendlywhose multi year stats place him at the bottom of the list for starting MLB short stops and he has a long term contract.

Wherever the convo travels from here, the "he doesn't have any trade value" part of it needs to be removed.

He doesn't have any trade value.

[Eli]

If Castro truly has no trade value, then just keep him and let him play the Jonathan Herrera role next year. Maybe that's too awkward of a possibility and they'd rather just start clean, but I don't see them just dumping him entirely without getting back some kind of value.

Fortunately, there are definitely a few GMs in baseball who will look at Castro's age and history and reckon he's worth something.  I think the Cubs will be able to trade him, and not get completely arseraped, either.

I agree. I imagine there are at least a few organizations who think they can fix him and are willing to take a chance on his age/past success. It'd just be a matter of how much they're willing to give up.

[SKO]

If Castro truly has no trade value, then just keep him and let him play the Jonathan Herrera role next year. Maybe that's too awkward of a possibility and they'd rather just start clean, but I don't see them just dumping him entirely without getting back some kind of value.

Fortunately, there are definitely a few GMs in baseball who will look at Castro's age and history and reckon he's worth something.  I think the Cubs will be able to trade him, and not get completely arseraped, either.

That's definitely possible. I think they can get rid of him for only a few hemorrhoids.

Also, a Shields type acquisition wouldn't replace Hendricks, it would replace Haren.  Adding Price next year would replace Hammel.  Hendricks at $510k isn't going anywhere. He makes Price possible.

His recent rough couple of starts since he pulled his hammy notwithstanding, I would still rather have Hammel than Shields next year. Hammel has been worth 3.7 fWAR since the start of 2014, Shields has been worth 4.3 (with Hammel having the edge this year at 2.0 vs 1.1). Plus they can extend Hammel (who obviously likes pitching in Chicago) next year or let him go at no cost to them after next year. They don't have an out with Shields.

This is a bad idea. However you phrase it you are replacing a starting pitcher with a different, more expensive starting pitcher who is almost a guaranteed bet to be worse than the guy he is replacing going forward.  Let it go.

[Chuck to Chuck]

If Castro truly has no trade value, then just keep him and let him play the Jonathan Herrera role next year. Maybe that's too awkward of a possibility and they'd rather just start clean, but I don't see them just dumping him entirely without getting back some kind of value.

Fortunately, there are definitely a few GMs in baseball who will look at Castro's age and history and reckon he's worth something.  I think the Cubs will be able to trade him, and not get completely arseraped, either.

That's definitely possible. I think they can get rid of him for only a few hemorrhoids.

Also, a Shields type acquisition wouldn't replace Hendricks, it would replace Haren.  Adding Price next year would replace Hammel.  Hendricks at $510k isn't going anywhere. He makes Price possible.

His recent rough couple of starts since he pulled his hammy notwithstanding, I would still rather have Hammel than Shields next year. Hammel has been worth 3.7 fWAR since the start of 2014, Shields has been worth 4.3 (with Hammel having the edge this year at 2.0 vs 1.1). Plus they can extend Hammel (who obviously likes pitching in Chicago) next year or let him go at no cost to them after next year. They don't have an out with Shields.

This is a bad idea. However you phrase it you are replacing a starting pitcher with a different, more expensive starting pitcher who is almost a guaranteed bet to be worse than the guy he is replacing going forward.  Let it go.

I only pick on Shields because: 1) Cubs did try to sign him this winter; 2) Reports are he's cleared waivers; 3) He has a contract that would save a team money in trading for Castro.

I'm sure there are other players who fit points 2 and 3.  That's the type of player the Cubs can get back right now for Castro.

[SKO]

If Castro truly has no trade value, then just keep him and let him play the Jonathan Herrera role next year. Maybe that's too awkward of a possibility and they'd rather just start clean, but I don't see them just dumping him entirely without getting back some kind of value.

Fortunately, there are definitely a few GMs in baseball who will look at Castro's age and history and reckon he's worth something.  I think the Cubs will be able to trade him, and not get completely arseraped, either.

That's definitely possible. I think they can get rid of him for only a few hemorrhoids.

Also, a Shields type acquisition wouldn't replace Hendricks, it would replace Haren.  Adding Price next year would replace Hammel.  Hendricks at $510k isn't going anywhere. He makes Price possible.

His recent rough couple of starts since he pulled his hammy notwithstanding, I would still rather have Hammel than Shields next year. Hammel has been worth 3.7 fWAR since the start of 2014, Shields has been worth 4.3 (with Hammel having the edge this year at 2.0 vs 1.1). Plus they can extend Hammel (who obviously likes pitching in Chicago) next year or let him go at no cost to them after next year. They don't have an out with Shields.

This is a bad idea. However you phrase it you are replacing a starting pitcher with a different, more expensive starting pitcher who is almost a guaranteed bet to be worse than the guy he is replacing going forward.  Let it go.

I only pick on Shields because: 1) Cubs did try to sign him this winter; 2) Reports are he's cleared waivers; 3) He has a contract that would save a team money in trading for Castro.

I'm sure there are other players who fit points 2 and 3.  That's the type of player the Cubs can get back right now for Castro.

The Cubs tried to sign him this winter and then balked at the price, his velocity has gone down, and the Padres backloaded his contract. They won't bite on it now.

And it's fine if your point is "this is the kind of player Castro can bring back in a trade." That's exactly why our response is "don't trade him, then." Paying Castro to be an $8 million dollar Jonathan Herrera is a better option to me than paying Shields $12 million (or whatever his salary-Castro's is) to be Edwin Jackson, which I'm pretty sure is where he's headed with that Flyball/HR rate and diminishing skills. Especially because there is a chance, however remote, that a 26 year old will suddenly rediscover his talent. Shields, however, is pretty clearly going to not get better after age 34.

[World's #1 Astros Fan]

If Castro truly has no trade value, then just keep him and let him play the Jonathan Herrera role next year. Maybe that's too awkward of a possibility and they'd rather just start clean, but I don't see them just dumping him entirely without getting back some kind of value.

Fortunately, there are definitely a few GMs in baseball who will look at Castro's age and history and reckon he's worth something.  I think the Cubs will be able to trade him, and not get completely arseraped, either.

I agree. I imagine there are at least a few organizations who think they can fix him and are willing to take a chance on his age/past success. It'd just be a matter of how much they're willing to give up.

I'd settle for some really long-range prospects that they won't have to worry about 40-man rostering for a while in the hopes that 1 of them might hit in 4-5 years.

[SKO]

If Castro truly has no trade value, then just keep him and let him play the Jonathan Herrera role next year. Maybe that's too awkward of a possibility and they'd rather just start clean, but I don't see them just dumping him entirely without getting back some kind of value.

Fortunately, there are definitely a few GMs in baseball who will look at Castro's age and history and reckon he's worth something.  I think the Cubs will be able to trade him, and not get completely arseraped, either.

I agree. I imagine there are at least a few organizations who think they can fix him and are willing to take a chance on his age/past success. It'd just be a matter of how much they're willing to give up.

I'd settle for some really long-range prospects that they won't have to worry about 40-man rostering for a while in the hopes that 1 of them might hit in 4-5 years.

This is fine. Frankly I refuse to believe that in a world where Omar Infante and his .542 OPS have started 105 games for the AL-leading Royals there's not one team willing to take a flyer on Castro. Heck, the Royals are a great example. Their limited financial resources led them to hand the starting DH job to Kendrys Morales and his .614 OPS from last year. He rebounded to have a pretty solid year for them. There are lots of teams out there that have to take gambles on guys like Castro. The Cubs might have to eat some money to make it work or pair him with a prospect of their own but he'll have some value in trade talks.

[SKO]

Didi Gregorious is starting for the Yankees with a  .659 OPS. Elvis Andrus hasn't sniffed a .700 OPS in three years. Those guys are better than Castro defensively, but there's going to be someone willing to try and gamble that he'll find his hitting stroke again. There's just not enough guys at that position who can hit a damn thing. Castro has hit before, someone will see if he can do it again.