top of page

Round Robin: Hindsight


Does this fill you with rage? (Pic: The Athletic)

Today, the Cubs DNA team looks at some bigger deals of the Chicago Cubs's immediate past and reevaluates them with the benefit of hindsight.


Would you undo the trade of Aroldis Chapman for Gleyber Torres, Adam Warren, Bill McKinney and Rashad Crawford?


Brooke: I don't think so. The World Series ended up being pretty perfect and I don't think Chapman gets enough credit for going out in the 9th inning and getting those three outs. Crying Chapman easily could have become a meme. I think the harder pill to swallow is that Torres was so easily traded away because it was thought that Russell was the shortstop of the Cubs future.

Matt: Never. Flags fly forever. Hindsight being 20/20, would've been amazing if they could've centered the deal around Russell but I don't think the Cubs were ready to hand over SS to Baez yet.

Pronk: Absolutely not. With the off and on struggles of the pitching staff since, Torres's bat might have been wasted. It stinks that's he's a future Hall of Famer or whatever Twitter wants to think, but it's nice to know that the Cubs scouting department is getting them right.

Staci: Nope. Maybe if you could sub in a pitcher of better character than Chapman to get the job done, but I'd still trade away those same players if it yielded the same result.

Steven: Not a chance. The Cubs saw their one weakness and addressed it. Does having any of those players now improve the chance of winning a World Series in the future? Outside of Torres, the answer is no. The Front Office made the right call in maximizing their chance at winning in 2016. And thankfully it paid off!

Tina: Not one bit. We gave up Gleyber but we don't win the World Series without Chapman. Also, I was glad to see Adam Warren leave, he was pretty unhelpful. (I'm being nice...)


Consensus: 6 No 0 Yes


Would you undo the trade of Jose Quintana for Eloy Jimenez, Dylan Cease, Matt Rose, and Bryant Flete?


Brooke: I guess it depends on what Q's return will be at the trade deadline in July 2020. All kidding aside, I don't undo it. With Heyward's contract, the Cubs were never going to have room for Jimenez, let him thrive on the Southside I actually think he's a great fit for that club.

Matt: Maybe. It really all depends on what the other move would have been. I was hoping they would get Verlander at the TDL but instead, they got Q. Meowlander has certainly been the better pitcher, but he's also been exponentially more expensive. Then again, if they had Verlander they probably don't sign Smyly, and maybe not Duensing either. I still think Theo signs Chatwood, so ultimately means we lose out on Darvish. So, while Q might have ultimately been less than we'd have hoped, he's been solid and allowed for other moves. I don't undo it.

Pronk: I don't think I do. The cheap contract of Q theoretically allowed for the signing of Darvish. Would you trade Darvish and Quintana straight up for Eloy right now? I don't think so. At least I wouldn't. I might feel another way in a year. Right now Eloy strikes out too much and plays too poor of defense. But we'll see. In another 2 years, Eloy could be a beast.

Staci: Q was worth more fWAR in 2019 than Jimenez and Cease combined. Don't let the negativity fool you--his deal is still worth the money. In the long run, the Cubs might actually miss Cease more than Jimenez, but I still wouldn't undo it.

Steven: Oh boy. Hindsight yes. At the time of the deal, the Cubs were in a rough period after just having won the World Series. That trade sparked the Cubs into the playoffs and gave the Cubs a good rotation piece for the next 3.5 years. But I do love Jimenez and Cease. I think they are going to have good/great careers and I would have loved to have seen it happen on the North side of Chicago.

Tina: Ugh, this is a tough one. We gave up a lot for a decent pitcher with a nice, controlled contract. I think I still do it. Q's been good, durable, and he's the Brew Crew Killa.


Consensus: 4 No 1 Yes 1 Maybe


Would you undo the trade of Jorge Soler for Wade Davis?


Brooke: I love Jorge (and his smile!), but let's face it he didn't exactly fit into the Cubs lineup whether it was because of his relationship with Maddon or because Heyward's contract was bigger. In the same way I think Jimenez is a good fit for the White Sox, I think Jorge is the right fit for the Royals.

Matt: Nope. He was an oft-injured, underperforming OF. We had plenty of those (still do, ope), it was an easy call even if Wade was only here for one season.

Pronk: No. At the time it was an even trade. Soler had to overcome major hurdles before breaking out this year. Good for him, but I'm not sure anyone could have predicted the 40+ home run power. In hindsight I'd like to undo it, but it's not a choice I'd regret.

Staci: Absolutely not. Soler is just now reaching his potential, and I'm not sure I'd even bank on it being a permanent thing after only one season. And Davis was nails in 2017.

Steven: No. The Cubs had given Soler many chances, but he could just never stay healthy. I love the guy but the Cubs were able to address the need in the bullpen and they did it from a position were they had a surplus. (My answer is also yes because of Jorge's smile.)

Tina: Jorge's smile??? Swoon! I feel a Forbidden Love farticle coming on... But my answer is no. I love Jorge and his power bat, but he couldn't seem to stay healthy here. I'll always cheer for him and was happy for his success last season. Plus Wade was a good addition to our BP and we needed a closer.


Consensus: 6 No 0 Yes


Jeimer Candelario for Alex Avila and Justin Wilson

Brooke: I'm meh for all three of these guys, so I guess, no?

Matt: Admittedly, this one never got on my radar as one to undo. Ultimately, I think the Cubs won this trade, easily. Especially since it has given Hurdle so much joy seeing Avila in a Cubs uniform!

Pronk: At one point, Candelario looked like a possible beast. Then he's slumped. I don't undo this trade. I do wish the Cubs had gotten more though.

Staci: Nope... Candy's looking like a bust right now, and Wilson was better in 2018 than most people gave him credit for.

Steven: No. The Cubs needed a bat and an arm and Candelario had no place to play on the big league team and was running out of minor league options. The trade didn't work out that year for the Cubs although Wilson did pitch better in 2018 like Staci mentioned, but it's a trade you don't undo.

Tina: I only like this trade for the unending entertainment we get when we mention Avila's name to Hurdle. Plus Staci had a new secret BF in Justin Wilson. Sorry, Jeimer.


Consensus: 6 No 0 Yes


Hi Hurdle!

Dan Vogelbach for Mike Montgomery


Brooke: No. Vogie wasn't going to take over first base for Rizzo! Monty was good while he lasted. I'd actually like to relook at the trade that basically became Monty for Kemp!

Matt: Nope. Vogs was a bat without a position. Monty was good until the end of his Cubs tenure. Good trade for both teams.

Pronk: No. He was blocked and the Cubs got a decent pitcher. I wish they could have gotten more, but that's okay.

Staci: Absolutely not. Vogie had a strong start to 2019 then absolutely fell off a cliff in the second half. I'm still not sure what the Mariners have there, and Montgomery gave the Cubs a few strong years of work before they traded him.

Steven: Am I the oddball here? Oh, we all say no so never mind. Monty didn't develop the way we hoped but he was still an effective pitcher for the Cubs and gave us the best baseball memory of all time.

Tina: No, Vogie would have languished in our system with no where to play. He's perfect in the AL. And Monty was more than serviceable for the time we had him.


Consensus: 6 No 0 Yes





15 views

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page