I don't really like it for the Pads, I don't really oppose to it either...more like, meh.

Here's the question I asked in the other thread: If the Cubs kept Walker, offered him arbitration, and obtained a draft pick when he left to another team, would Ceda be better than that draft pick?

If the Cubs could get someone in the first 40 picks or so who is a better prospect than Ceda, there is really no point in this deal.

Ah, but you only get the picks if the player doesn't accept arbitration, and Walker is likely to get more money from arbitration that he is on the Free Agent market.

The likely outcome, to me, of the Cubs offering arbitration to Walker would be them being stuck with another player that they don't actually want for somewhere between $4-6M a year. In Free Agency, I think Walker starts moving along the Reggie Sanders career path, where he keeps getting one year, $2M offers.

The Cubs season is over

Could've fooled me.

If the Cubs could get someone in the first 40 picks or so who is a better prospect than Ceda, there is really no point in this deal.

Saves the Trib a 600K signing bonus.

Good risk for SD, whereas Ceda (who has hit 99 on the gun but doesn't know what he's doing yet) is a nice flyer for the Cubs. Win-win. Plus, I got to type this, so it's win-win-win.

He's Rick Vaughn indeed. He could be Joel Zumaya also if he learns how to control it.

Ah, but you only get the picks if the player doesn't accept arbitration, and Walker is likely to get more money from arbitration that he is on the Free Agent market.

Yeah, there is the risk that Walker would agree to arbitrate. Is that so bad? Maybe they would spend a million or two more, plus the signing bonus on the draft pick, but this is the same organization that happily shelled out $5mm to Neifi Perez. Money isn't an issue for this team.

The real issue is whether the Cubs would be willing to risk the idea of Walker manning 2B for them next year, when they already have Neifi, Cedeno, and now Izturis.

Of course, if they kept Walker, maybe they wouldn't have dealt for Izturis . . . which makes it even more of a good idea.

Yeah - I wouldn't have been too worried about the arb angle.... If Walker accepted - he goes into 2007 as likely the best 2b option for hte Cubs anyway - and he certainly wasn't going to get a whole lot more than he made this year had the case actually gone before an arbitrator (I can't remember the last time the Cubs didn't sign all their arb accepters... ).

Nothing to be excited about with any of the 3 Cubs dump trades -- but pulling out the last vestiges of my Hendry defending tendencies, this sure seemed like an awfully good year to be buying rather than selling. Frankly - that makes about zero sense to me -- with both the AL and NL West wide open, nobody except the Cubs and Pirates truly out of it in the NL --- it seemed like a perfect situation for sellers. Frankly - I would have rather gotten Betemit. Had the Dodgers been willing to part with someone say... just below the Billingsley pedigree- I would have included A-Ram, too.

Obtaining a slight upgrade at 3B for a young prospect doesn't really do anything for me. I didn't expect to be bowled over by any Padres trade, but I was hoping to feel a slight tremor at least.

Obtaining a slight upgrade at 3B for a young prospect doesn't really do anything for me.

If he can't play second in San Diego, he probably won't accept arbitration and the Padres get a draft pick to replace Ceda.

If the Cubs kept Walker, offered him arbitration, and obtained a draft pick when he left to another team, would Ceda be better than that draft pick?

The Cubs seem to like wild fireballers as prospects. It's possible they are very high on Ceda and do believe they won't improve on him by getting the draft pick.

The Cubs seem to like wild fireballers as prospects. It's possible they are very high on Ceda and do believe they won't improve on him by getting the draft pick.

Obviously, but my point was that if the Cubs picked at #40 or thereabouts, they'd probably take a young fireballer who would go to either Mesa or Boise . . basically, the same type of guy as Ceda.

The downside is the possibility that Todd Walker stays with the team next season for $4mm or so and that they don't get a Ceda-clone. The upside is that you field a more credible team for the next two months at a cost of $500k.

It probably makes little difference in the end, but my point is that if the Cubs were going to make a trade, they'd want more than the draft pick they'd be able to pick up anyway.

It seems that Nate Silver agrees with me, at least as he went into in today's column:

This was a really awful move by the Cubs, by the way. Todd Walker has a reasonably good chance of being a Type A free agent (a distinction that has been bestowed on infielders like Tony Graffanino and Royce Clayton in the recent past), and for the mere gambit of offering arbitration to a player that they could probably use anyway, the Cubs would have a good chance of drafting two prospects with much more upside than the A-ball reliever they picked up in this deal.