Cash Rules Everything Around Me

Share Button

The Andrew Cashner for Anthony Rizzo deal has been a hot topic this season with the apparent Cashner breakout, and the Cubs have received their fair share of backlash for the deal, but was it really a bad deal like some media outlets have made it seem? I’m not too sure.

In 2013, Andrew Cashner had the breakout season that fans had been hoping for. Cashner finally faced his biggest flaw, and he pitched 175 innings for the Padres and finished his first full major league season with an ERA just over 3. Many pundits hyped Cashner as their breakout pick for this season, but Cashner’s real breakout was in 2013. He settled right into the spacious confines of Petco Park and was able to limit the home runs and post the lowest walk rates of his career throughout the majors and the minors. Cashner’s newfound dominance has certainly left Cubs fans a bit upset with what they gave away, but were they completely unwise in moving him? I don’t think so. We have to remember that through his short career the 27 year old has already battled through many season ruining injuries, including damage to his rotator cuff.

Rizzo DefenseAnthony Rizzo has unfortunately not quite made the impression on his organization that Cashner has as he is coming into his third year with the Cubs. While the first basemen showed definite promise in his first sample with the team in 2012, 2013 was a massive step backwards as Rizzo was overburdened by an increased strikeout rate and some of the worst platoon splits in the major leagues. While the 24 year old has started the 2014 campaign off rather strong, it is understandably tough to completely shake off his struggles last season.

While Cashner has clearly been the better big leaguer so far, we shouldn’t be so quick to judge the front office for this move just yet. Remember, Cashner already has a history of injury, and if nothing else, the start to this season should tell you that pitchers get hurt. Even if Rizzo is merely a slightly above average first basemen, he still has far more certainty to stay on the field than Cashner will.

So while I understand the desire to go blast the front office for this deal, maybe you shouldn’t just go freak out about one year of numbers just yet. Both of these players have a few seasons of control left to be judged for, so wait a bit for calling this trade a total abortion. Remember, even if Rizzo isn’t great, if Cashner blows out his shoulder again would you really rather have kept him?

2 Replies to “Cash Rules Everything Around Me”

  1. I’m still on the Rizzo side of this deal (and that probably makes me a sucker for everything the FO does, but I can live with that).

    There’s the issue of replacements, too, which I think goes unmentioned in this discussion. Without Rizzo, the first base position looks incredibly bleak well into the future – would we be waiting on Dan Vogelbach as the long term solution? *shudders*

    Also first base was at the the time of the trade, in my opinion, the weakest it had been in decades, and finding even a league average one may have turned out to be a very difficult quest. The Cubs acquired and locked up one that looks like he could be above average for a decade.

    However, all of this is probably moot, cause this team would have blown ass the last few years whether they had Rizzo or Cashner, and will probably blow ass throughout the remaining years of Cashner’s team control.

    • With no Rizzo, I belive Olt would be getting the play time there now, but Olt is a more recent acquisition and there certainly would have been a big hole there before him.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *