Theo Epstein on more than one occasion referred to Sean Marshall as the best left-handed reliever in baseball. Assuming this wasn't just hype, was trading Marshall a good idea?
On the whole, I really liked Marshall as a player. I'm sorry not to have him - one of the more agreeable Cubs on a team of singularly disagreeable figures - to root for. I always thought Marshall got short-changed a bit when he wasn't given the chance to start on a consistent basis. Now that he has established himself as a consistent setup man, it seems he is consigned to that role for the indefinite future.
Given that status, though, it makes sense to consider him an asset of some value who can be exchanged for assets the Cubs as a team do not possess in abundance. Also, relief pitchers are an odd bunch just because generally they are not good enough or complete enough commodities to produce consistently for many years. Usually this is because of some defect in their makeup as players or because they have only one or two quality pitches.
Marshall is different in this respect, as he seems to possess three or four quality pitches. In other words, he has starter stuff if not a starter's mindset. He'll probably help the Reds significantly this year if they manage to transform themselves into genuine contenders.
The Reds, for their part, seem hellbent on trading away all their promising young players and prospects for a chance to win the division this year and/or next before Joey Votto inevitably departs as a free agent. They have a point. Their bet is the Cardinals and Brewers will be significantly weakened by the departure of their superstar first basemen and the Cubs won't be in a position to contend.
On balance, I think the trade will benefit both teams, but the Cubs more both in the short and long term. Obviously, the immediate need for the Cubs is perceived to be starting pitching. You can't really argue with that. Last season turned into a complete disaster when two of their five starters went down in the first week of the year. They just didn't have the personnel in the minors to even halfway replace them and every effort to go out into the market brought back an even bigger loser than the last.
Travis Wood showed a lot of promise in his rookie year even though he regressed some in 2011. In a way, he rather resembles Sean Marshall five years ago. If you look at his numbers, he has a much better record on the road. This is consistent with him being a fly ball pitcher and Cincinnati's stadium being a home run park. Of course, when the wind blows out at Wrigley, this is going to give Wood similar problems, but actually the Cubs home field is by no means the homer friendly ballpark it is generally portrayed to be most of the time.
The Cubs did manage to obtain two potentially useful chips as part of the exchange. Ronald Torreyes has put up Starlin Castro type numbers at A ball and he looks to be a key to this deal. From what I have read, he is a great raw talent and might be on a fast track to the majors, certainly not this coming year, but probably not long after. He plays second base.
Dave Sappelt is the other player involved. He played a bit last year with the Reds, but was not impressive. He had good numbers in the minors and was thought to be the best hitter in the Reds organization in 2010. A good defensive outfielder, he looks like a patient hitter, but he doesn't have the power numbers expected of a corner outfielder. He can play center field, which is a plus, but right now he projects as a fourth or fifth outfielder or a platoon option. He has stolen a lot of bases in the minors, but he seems to get caught stealing almost as often as he succeeds.
So far I don't have a major quarrel with any of Epstein and Hoyer's moves, however small the steps have been. And they are quite right to listen to offers on just about everyone on the team. I do take issue though with the expectation they will trade Garza, as well as the notion they are in a complete rebuilding mode.
I don't think it makes any sense to trade Garza. I've never thought the Cubs starting pitching was as bad as it looked last year. You have to remember they have had the dumbest and worst fielding team in baseball for several years running, so pitching stats are not necessarily reliable in evaluating these guys, even the more advanced stats like FIP and xFIP.
That being said, unless you are getting back absolute knockout prospects, you have to look at how you are going to replace a pitcher of Garza's quality given the paucity of genuine talent in the Cubs minor league system. I'm inclined to think a lot of the Garza talk is designed to force the pitcher's hand into signing an extension now that ties him up for an additional two or three years beyond his free agent year. Given his performance last year, Garza's numbers are going to look even better after next year even if the Cubs are a mediocre team, if only because they may have several more players who can catch. That sort of season is likely to push him into big money territory coming into his contract year.
You have only to look at the money being thrown around to pitchers like C.J. Wilson, for example, to see where this is headed. It makes sense for the Cubs to extend Garza now, which is what I think they will do if he is agreeable.
As for the Cubs rebuilding, if you look at the moves the new regime is making, they are not long-term future-oriented moves at all. Rather they are near-term or middle-term acquisitions. All the guys they have obtained are either young major leaguers or major league ready talent with the exception of Torreyes.
So far the Cubs have not made a major move, but I would not discount such an initiative in the near future if they have a chance. Major market teams with big budget potential do not strip down to near nothing.
I look for the Cubs to start retooling their outfield next. This is the worst outfield in the major leagues and one of the real sources of their problems. They can start by dumping Soriano and trading Byrd.
