The inter webs are buzzing over the Bob Nightengale, USA Today piece that quotes sources as saying the Cubs are open to trading anyone on their roster except pitcher Jeff Samardzija. The inference was that the Cubs would listen to offers on any of their players, including their 22 year old All-Star potential shortstop Starlin Castro.
Some fans believe Castro, the first truly young Cub prospect to make it in the majors right off the bat, is the foundation of the future. Other fans believe that Castro is still too raw (especially on defense), not disciplined at the plate (a Soriano influence of free swinging) and is not improving all his skill sets as one would expect.
Castro takes a free wheeling approach at the plate. His talent level, eye to hand coordination, is so great that he can get wood on just about any pitch near the plate. He has consistently hit around .300, but he has a low on-base percentage. His plate discipline has been criticized because he does not like to take pitches or draw walks. He has yet to show consistent power or RBI production ability of a #3 or #4 hitter.
It is clear that Castro's trade "value" is at its highest at the present moment. There is no doubt that a dozen or so teams would love to pencil in Castro at short in their line-up.
The question is at what cost?
Are teams willing to give up two "impact" prospects, or major league ready players, for one .300 hitting shortstop with some clear deficiencies? If Castro is the one missing piece in a contender's playoff run, the answer is yes. If it a team on the bubble who may be a gun-shy "buyer" at the trade deadline, perhaps not.
Every general manager needs to be open about trading any of the team's players at any time. Some GMs fall in love with their own draft choices to the point of "over-valuating" them (and in turn, undervaluing other team prospects). Since Epstein is allegedly keen on managing "assets," Castro's contract is one of those assets that need to constantly valued against the open market.
But if you really want an independent view of the Cub talent, it will be on what other teams are willing to pay for a player. At present, the most valuable player on the roster is Samardzija, as starting pitching is still a premium in baseball. Samardzija is more "tradable" than Dempster or Garza because a) his performance this year, b) his cost (current contract) and c) control. The second most tradable Cub commodity would be LHP Maholm, for similar reasons. As for position players, a team may want to shore up their bench with veteran help so a Reed Johnson may be asked about (but the Cubs would get very little in return). The only impact trade of a position player would be Castro.
Would the Cubs trade Castro? You need to look at the organizational depth chart to see who is in the infield pipeline to see if the risk-reward would be positive. Castro's current back up is Darwin Barney, which is not a potential upgrade. In the minor league system, the Cubs scouts are still positive on Junior Lake (AA) and Baez (A). But those players would not be ready to take over at short for several years. In order to trade Castro, the Cubs would have to get a major league ready shortstop in return, plus other value.
One last factor to consider: the public relations aspect of a Castro deal. Some fans will moan that the Cubs traded away a foundational player. "Oh no, another Lou Brock trade!" they will yell. In all the recent snafus by the Ricketts clan, negative public relations issues about trading away a star player for prospects may not sell tickets or help ownership's standing in the community.
So a Castro trade would bring the most talent back as the Cubs would be "selling high," but it would also bring a rash of more negative publicity to a club mired in its own PR mistakes.
