25 Dec 2018 08:19:31
Ok....so take this with a grain of salt

Someone who posts on the SBN Rays blog said today "Sorry I am off topic, but my sources tell me the Rays are close to getting Kris Bryant from the Cubs. The Cubs need to clear money for Bryce Harper and repair their depleted farm system. WOW"

So, I honestly have no idea who this person is or whether they can be trusted. It's probably safe to say this is not true. I did a little "sleuthing" and I think this guy might work for the Rays fan experience department, so maybe there is some merit?

Either way, what do you think a reasonable package for Bryant would look like? You would think the Cubs would want some cheap major league talent back in addition to prospects. For this thought exercise, I will be referencing "surplus value" only to create a "ballpark" value for Bryant and any other pieces involved.

It's also worth mentioning some of the intangible variables that could affect Bryant's trade value. First off, Bryant is a Boras client and is thought to be unwilling to sign an extension. Second, Bryant is coming off of a injury and had surgery this offseason. Lastly, there is thought to be some tension between Bryant and the Cubs front office after his representatives filed a grievance for keeping him in the minors to begin the 2015 season.

Bryant is likely to be very expensive in his remaining three years of arbitration. He is projected for 12.5M by MLBTR and 14M by Cots. It's safe to assume he should cost around 50M in arbitration. Even then, if he averages 6 wins per season, he should still be worth a little over 100M in surplus value.

When news first broke in November that the Cubs could be willing to trade Bryant, Mike Petriello of MLB.com put together some trade packages. For Bryant AND Schwarber, Petriello suggested a package that included Pham, McKay and Honeywell.

Here is what I think a package could look like with a breakdown:

CHC: 3B Bryant, RP Pedro Strop

TB: INF Robertson, SP/1B McKay, SS Fox, SP Linares, RP Stanek

So the two main pieces of this deal would be Robertson and McKay. In 2018 Robertson enjoyed a break out year posting a 127 wRC+ and 2.3 WAR in 88 games, fueled by an uptick in power and improved plate discipline. Capable of handling any infield position, Robertson would immediately help fill the void of Bryant at the major league level. Only 24 years old, Robertson still has 5 years of control remaining and should be a very valuable asset, especially if he can maintain the improvements he made in 2018.

McKay is widely considered one of the best left handed starters and first basemen in minor league ball. Moving to a NL club would exponentially increase his value, as he would be able to hit as a starter and pinch hit on the days he doesn't start. Despite the below average wRC+ in his career, Bumgarner has already amassed 4.6 wins offensively, largely due to the positional adjustment. A pitcher that can come anywhere close to league average offense would be incredibly valuable, not to mention the ability to actually play the field as well.

Fox and Linares would add more talent to a weak minor league system. Fox has seen his stock rise recently after a very impressive AFL campaign and should be able to stick at SS, offering above average speed and defense up the middle. Linares gives the Cubs a young left handed starter with a mid 90's fastball and impressive upside.

Lastly, Stanek would help fill the void left by Strop in the bullpen. Regularly able to hit triple digits, Stanek had a breakout rookie year and excelled late in games and as an "opener" for the Rays. Strop is in the last year of his 3 year contract extension and would save the Cubs another 6.5M. This would give the Rays a veteran closer at the back of the bullpen, something they have reportedly been looking for.

1.) 26 Dec 2018
25 Dec 2018 23:32:33
The big draw for Harper going to Chicago is his friendship with Bryant. Trading Bryant would jeopardize that potential relationship.

Another factor you didn’t mention in Bryant’s case: he’s a fan favorite. Think about what it would have cost a team to trade for Madison Bumgarner after the ‘14 World Series. There’d be riots.

Bryant to the Rays starts with Blake Snell, and probably includes multiple other gut-punching pieces.

That’s not what is “fair” for the acquiring team, but this is what a team will reasonably demand for a fan favorite.

2.) 26 Dec 2018
26 Dec 2018 02:33:15
I've read no such things. Bryant isn't making a ton of money (estimated 12.4 million in 2019) and trading him would not clear that much space. be realistic.

3.) 26 Dec 2018
26 Dec 2018 04:26:00
Bryant to the Rays does not start with Cy Young Snell. That's silly talk. The Rays have enough good prospects to make a trade. Acquiring Snell for Bryant defeats the purpose for trading for him in the first place.

4.) 26 Dec 2018
26 Dec 2018 14:17:28
I never said it was fair for the Rays. But it makes zero sense for the Cubs to trade Bryant unless they are blown away.

I think that would require Snell.

Also, it makes no sense for the Cubs to spend all that money on Harper if they lose Bryant’s offense in that lineup. This is a super one-sided idea.

5.) 26 Dec 2018
26 Dec 2018 19:05:27
Ok. so the whole point of the this exercise was trying to determine what trade BOTH teams would agree upon, not an unrealistic trade from the Rays or Cubs perspective.

The Rays would never trade Snell right now and you could easily argue that Snell has just as much trade value as Bryant considering he is under control for an additional year and does not come with any injury concerns, something that cannot be said about Bryant. While Bryant's friendship with Harper and his "fan favorite" status do carry some intangible value, those variables are far less quantifiable than injury concerns, inflated arbitration costs, and unwillingness to sign an extension.

The Rays have a top 3 farm system in baseball and major league depth that they can trade from, they do not NEED to trade Snell to acquire someone like Bryant. The Rays have more than enough pieces to trade for almost anyone, including 5+ top 50 prospects and 8-12 top 100 prospects as well a very deep young bullpen and multiple expendable major league assets.

"I've read no such things. Bryant isn't making a ton of money (estimated 12.4 million in 2019) and trading him would not clear that much space. be realistic. "

Again, if you read what I wrote, this person is claiming to have "inside knowledge, " so clearly this information would not be freely available on the internet. Does that mean I believe this person, absolutely not. Not the point. Further, I did not start the rumor of Bryant being available to trim payroll. An ESPN report in November led some to believe that Bryant could be moved as part of an effort to increase the club's payroll flexibility this winter. While Bryant's salary for 2019 (12-14M) would not be inhibitive, he will get expensive very quickly, pushing 20M in 2020 and likely exceeding that figure in 2021.

Considering the Cubs have one of the worst farm systems in baseball, they could view this as an opportunity to restock the farm system. If the Cubs want to extend their window, they will need to make sure sure they have plenty of depth and talent in the minor league system on the way. This is why I think a team like the Rays, who have arguably the deepest system in baseball, could offer the Cubs a very deep, rich package.

I also think you might be underselling Daniel Robertson. He made huge strides in 2018 and looks like a perennial 3+ win player. If the Cubs could bring in Robertson and Harper, at the expense of Bryant, that should still be an net gain in expected wins.

6.) 26 Dec 2018
26 Dec 2018 19:26:17
The biggest problem i have with this and 90% of your posts is you claim things to be close. where is your source? No one has read anything on any other site. Also ESPN is not a reliable baseball source these days. The whole thing about the Cubs be willing to trade Bryant they were open to trading anyone and listen to offers, but they weren't going to do and there haven't been any Bryant rumors about teams being in talks.

7.) 26 Dec 2018
26 Dec 2018 19:49:01
"While Bryant's friendship with Harper and his "fan favorite" status do carry some intangible value, those variables are far less quantifiable than injury concerns, inflated arbitration costs, and unwillingness to sign an extension. "

It's more quantifiable than you think. Ask yourself, how often do large market teams trade away players who have won ROY, MVP, and helped them win a World Series. If your answer isn't "almost never", then you're lying to yourself. Bryant brings more fans to Wrigley himself than the entire attendance at Tropicana. I live in Cubs territory. They would riot if they traded him for anything short of a monumentally stupid return from the other team.

"they do not NEED to trade Snell to acquire someone like Bryant. "

None of this is about who is "needed", or farm systems. Literally, no one in Chicago will freaking care about your precious little farm system. Bryant will require the most absurd package we've seen in a long time, and for good reason.

"Again, if you read what I wrote, this person is claiming to have "inside knowledge, " so clearly this information would not be freely available on the internet"

Yes, I read your following words. But this is stupid. Every major reporter in Chicago has shot down the notion that the Cubs are interested in trading Bryant this winter. Every. Single. One. The ESPN article was quickly shrugged off and laughed at by Epstein. Your "inside knowledge" guy is blowing smoke out of his ass. Ignore him.

"Considering the Cubs have one of the worst farm systems in baseball, they could view this as an opportunity to restock the farm system. "

No, they wouldn't. They've made the playoffs four consecutive seasons, they look posed to do it again in 2019. A farm system would do them zero good right now.

"While Bryant's salary for 2019 (12-14M) would not be inhibitive, he will get expensive very quickly, pushing 20M in 2020 and likely exceeding that figure in 2021."

Are you serious? The Cubs' owners basically print money in their home. The Ricketts family owns billions of dollars worth of assets, and they are one of the most luxurious franchises in American sports. They can afford to pay Kris Bryant if they want. (And if they need to move money, they'll move less popular players with very little difficulty) .

"I also think you might be underselling Daniel Robertson. He made huge strides in 2018 and looks like a perennial 3+ win player. If the Cubs could bring in Robertson and Harper, at the expense of Bryant, that should still be an net gain in expected wins. "

Look, bossman, I love metrics as much as the next guy. But the cheese has literally fallen off your cracker if you think teams think this way. Bryant has more value, from both a player's standpoint and a business standpoint.

Also, expected wins? Even the most generous projection for Robertson vs. the least generous for Bryant has Bryant with almost 4 more wins in 2019.

The Cubs aren't going to trade Kris Bryant for your spare parts. It won't happen, and it's best to move along from this horrible silly take.

8.) 26 Dec 2018
26 Dec 2018 20:08:11
You know what, forget it.

I said multiple times, a poster on the SBN Rays site claims to have an inside source. I do not. I also stated multiple times that I do not believe this person. Despite the fact that I did share some drinks with Andrew Friedman at a bar years ago and was almost hired by the Rays out of college, I do not have any inside source and have never made claims as such. Further, I have never proclaimed anything is close with any deal, I have literally no idea how you are creating this false narrative. Please feel free to cite anything you deem to be relative to these accusations. I agree that ESPN is not a reliable source but, again, I was merely citing the nexus of the said rumor that Bryant could be available.

The whole point of this post was to entertain the possibility that such a trade could occur and what it would look like. In that respect, you all fail.

9.) 26 Dec 2018
26 Dec 2018 21:00:45
Good grief, the whole point if this "thought experiment" was to entertain something incredibly unlikely because some crazy person suggested it was going to happen. That's it. I was hoping people could look at this objectively and ascertain what a trade "could" look like, not get up in arms about whether such a trade "could" ever occur. So much for thinking people could actually do this.

I say injury concerns and arbitration costs are more quantifiable because they are. Injury concerns can be factored into projections and arbitration costs can be factored into surplus value.

"Literally, no one in Chicago will freaking care about your precious little farm system. "

If the Cubs are making moves to appease the fanbase and not doing what is best for the organization longterm, there is a problem. While most casual fans may not care about the strength of the farm system and the viability of longterm success, I am sure the organization does. The Cubs have a very smart and progressive FO.

"Every major reporter in Chicago has shot down the notion that the Cubs are interested in trading Bryant this winter. "

Reporters generally only know what the FO wants them to know and are often used as conduits to spread specific information.

"They've made the playoffs four consecutive seasons, they look posed to do it again in 2019. A farm system would do them zero good right now. "

A strong farm system is incredibly important to maintaining longterm sustainable success, regardless of how much money you have. Teams who invest all of their prospect capital in short term investments risk having their window close sooner than later.

"Are you serious? The Cubs' owners basically print money in their home. The Ricketts family owns billions of dollars worth of assets, and they are one of the most luxurious franchises in American sports. They can afford to pay Kris Bryant if they want. "

The Cubs are already over the CB tax threshold. There is a reason why team like the Yankees and Dodgers, who can basically print own money as well, do not want to exceed the threshold and pay exorbitant penalties. I highly, highly doubt the Cubs to not care about this. They most likely do care about keeping their payroll under the CB tax threshold, to think otherwise would be silly.

"Even the most generous projection for Robertson vs. the least generous for Bryant has Bryant with almost 4 more wins in 2019."

Projections are going to unfavorably project more positive regression with Bryant and negative regression for Robertson. Even if the strides Robertson made in 2018 are substantial, projections are still going to heavily factor in his performance prior to 2018. Similarly, Bryant will see a boost in his projection, because although he is coming off a a down year, injury and surgery, his performance prior to 2018 is going to heavily boost his projections.

"The Cubs aren't going to trade Kris Bryant for your spare parts. It won't happen, and it's best to move along from this horrible silly take. "

If you think Robertson, the second best pitching prospect in baseball, 2 top 75-150 prospects, and a young backend bullpen arm is "spare parts, " there is no chance we could come to terms on a reasonable package. Again, sorry for thinking some of you could entertain an unlikely hypothetical without letting your own subjective "fandom" get in the way.

Moving on.

10.) 26 Dec 2018
26 Dec 2018 21:08:08
BATMAN, the whole notion of teams "listening to offers" leads guys like Bossman and other fans to think, "they are trading him. " It's kind of hilarious to read them go on and on about it.

"Listening to offers" usually means, we'll let teams tell us who they'd give, but we'd have to blown away. And it's a good tactic for sportswriters to find things to write about in the winter. It's no different than "Team X is interested in Player Y". Team X is only interested in Player Y if they can get Player Y at their price point. And they are only listening for offers they want to hear.

I'm about 99% sure that a package starting with Daniel Robertson won't get talks going with Theo Epstein. Bossman is off his rocker.

11.) 26 Dec 2018
26 Dec 2018 21:39:01
Just when I thought we had moved on from our past transgressions, you continue with the person blows and continue to pander to your audience.

You also LOVE to create false narratives and engage in misleading rhetoric. Allow me to lay this out clearly for you, I do not think the Cubs are trading Bryant, I do not think this person is telling the truth, I have been following this game for a long time and understand the semantics of how trades work. I do not need this spelled out nor do I need someone telling me "how I think. "

Keep your childish insults to yourself and try to conduct yourself likes someone who actually has some intelligence and merit to offer.

12.) 26 Dec 2018
26 Dec 2018 22:58:23
You know, you guys have been going back and forth for awhile now on multiple topics. You both sound pretty knowledgeable on the sport and pretty intelligent in general. And I actually like reading the debates.

I respect people that are confident, but I have a feeling some egos and stubbornness is getting in the way here.

On a side note, Did you know Chris Bryant was drafted out of high school in the 18th round by my Blue Jays? I just learned that Today.

13.) 27 Dec 2018
26 Dec 2018 23:39:38
His name is KRIS. not CHRIS, you idiot! lol just kidding, and yeah, I secretly enjoy the debates too. I do respect "thestatbook" and I would hope he feels the same. It's ok to disagree and it's certainly ok to disagree passionately. I would rather get into a passionate argument with someone who has the opposite political ideologies than argue with someone who is indifferent.

14.) 27 Dec 2018
27 Dec 2018 00:18:39
As long as you say something thestatbook can continue the conversation with, he will, you have yourself to blame for that. But you are wrong on what to start the package with Daniel Robertson is not a headliner in a trade. He is right Snell would be the starting point for the Cubs, as well as Honeywell, probably McKay, Fox or Solak, and one or two others.

15.) 27 Dec 2018
27 Dec 2018 01:27:22
How is saying you’re off your rocker an insult? It’s plainly clear to every person here.

You really think the Cubs would trade their most popular player for a bunch of guys no one outside of Fangraphs or Tampa know? Those are spare parts for a guy who won the MVP just two years ago and is still in his prime.

Yes, teams consider their fans in moves. All the time. Tampa Bay just doesn’t because they don’t have any fans, so I understand how this is a surprise to you.

Why else do guys like Matt Cain get stupid extensions? Or Miguel Cabrera? It’s because of the fans. Those are stupid contracts for anyone. If teams didn’t care about the fans in the stands, Madison Bumgarner would have been moved months ago.

Growing up in Nebraska and having family who works in TD Ameritrade corporate (and having a Ricketts in governor’s mansion) I feel comfortable knowing the Cubs wouldn’t remotely entertain an idea that didn’t involve a superstar for Bryant. They also don’t care about the luxury tax as much as you think they do. Again, with your team’s cheap-ass owner, I can see the confusion regarding teams who actually spend money.

Teams will pay the cost if they keep winning. Example: Boston Red Sox. Bryant won’t be traded, and he certainly won’t be traded for that cost.

Don’t get all upset that people told you how ridiculous this was.

16.) 27 Dec 2018
27 Dec 2018 01:38:59
For what it’s worth, I did suggest that such a trade would have to include Blake Snell. I defended that by suggesting Bryant’s value to the team as a fan favorite (not to mention his obvious marketability) .

You proceeded to parade your own intelligence, citing the drinks you had with Friedman and felt it necessary to let us all know you were almost hired by the Rays (a desperate attempt to defend yourself to a crowd turning on you) .

You’re another run-of-the-mill homer on this site. You can’t handle any argument that speaks against your beloved Rays. You just handle it by trying to piss farther than everyone, and then get mad when it doesn’t go well for you.

We tried engaging with you. Your arrogance got in the way of a decent discussion.

17.) 27 Dec 2018
27 Dec 2018 01:50:03
The standard response from bossman is getting funny, as he’s said many times. Here it is: “smart FOs don’t do (fill in the blank), they (fill in with bossman’s idea) ”

It’s incredible for you to come here, treat everyone like you’re smarter, and that your way is exactly what “smart front offices” do, and then get mad at perceived insults.

You are literally so arrogant you think front offices do all the things you think of. I’m sure there’s a reason Friedman never hired you. You think too highly of yourself and your own ideas.

You’re triggered by every person not infatuated with your intelligence. It’s both adorable and infuriating.