I totally understand that not ever prospect will make it to the bigs, much less make it and have an impact, but can anyone logically explain the Loux for Brigham exchange that occurred tonight? Do the Rangers feel that guilty about Brigham's injury that they would exchange 1st round talent for him, and essentially exchange Loux for Soto....how in the hell does this make any sense, someone please help me out.

This move was made to impact future business, and it was honest business from the Rangers perspective.

I will not be surprised to see the Rangers turn Soto into a $2M-$3M backup. I'd be okay with that.

As for Loux, the whole "1st round talent" thing is inflating his future worth. At best, he would crack the 25-man over the summer as a long-man in the Texas bullpen. He's not a can't-miss prospect or anything, probably rating out somewhere in the late 20's or early 30's in our system. He's a low-ceiling, high-basement arm who projects as a fringe starter in the Major Leagues. If he develops to the best of his abilities, you're probably looking at a future #4 starter. Most likely scenario is that he winds up fluctuating between a replacement-level starter and long-reliever in the pros.

It has nothing to do with an injury. This is Rangers re-acquiring a player they like.

Chicago had to either expose someone like Brigham to the Rule 5 draft, or trade him, because they were out of room on their 40 man roster. The Rangers, with some leftover 40 man slots at the moment, offered Loux (a lesser prospect than Brigham in their view) and a 2nd even-lower prospect (who is TBNL) for Brigham.

TBNL - is because they will wait and send someone who clears the Rule 5 draft.

@david "no, it's got a lot to do with an injury" - people on twitter who know what they're talking about

@David

That's bullshit. Brigham arguably wouldn't have even been on the 40-man roster even if he was healthy. He has an elbow strain. In terms you can understand, that means he's going to miss 2013. If he was healthy, the Cubs wouldn't have traded him back to us.

This trade has everything to do with the future relationship between Jon Daniels and Theo Epstein, who have dealt with one another on different occasions in the past. Moves like this are why I love Jon Daniels.

It is insults like "In terms you can understand" that begin to derail threads. I thought David's comment was rational and not insulting. Relax man, just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are trying to beat you over the head with anything.

Eric, when you say "Brigham arguably wouldn't have even been on the 40-man roster even if he was healthy" you're again pontificating with foolishness. Brigham was on Chicago's 40 man. When Texas got him again, he was placed on the Rangers 40 man.

The need to keep him on the 40-man is revelatory as to value.

Regarding his injury, maybe there was some aspect of that in play to a degree. But I'm skeptical of your extreme claim ("He has an elbow strain. In terms you can understand, that means he's going to miss 2013. If he was healthy, the Cubs wouldn't have traded him back to us") that he'll have to miss 2013 and it somehow damaged his value. No surgery was needed (they just shut him down a few weeks before the end of the season), and he still has 40-man roster value..

This was a move with the impending Rule 5 draft as a prime factor.

hey Eric...

Why you gotta be such a dick bro? The dude was being cool and you just insulted him for no reason with the whole "in terms you'll understand" comment. Do you realize how many threads you derail with your drivel, regardless of how intelligent you may appear to some. I bet you get to spend a lot of time by your self don't you?

And another thread gets blown all to hell.

This board was a much better place before @eric reining joined it.

To be honest after watching the rough riders on tv I got attached to brigham(as he seemingly was on every week). and was sad to see him go in the soto deal and to be honest the farm is full of starters with at least 4/5 type stuff not to mention brigham could be a impact reliever as early as next year

Eric has been here a lot longer than the troll or trolls who have been following him lately. He brings a lot more to this board than they do. Including the one who just posted that.

I honestly see it as JD giving them Loux so the Cubs wont get screwed over. We always liked Brigham and probably were higher on him than we were Loux but like someone above mentioned this trade was about giving them something since Brigham got hurt. It was a smart move by JD that will probably help our trading relationship with the Cubs.

It's just... It has nothing to do with an injury. This is Rangers re-acquiring a player they like is too definitive and too tunnel-vision of a way at looking at this.

If the Rangers went out reacquiring players they liked, why didn't they make strong pushes to bring back John Danks or Brandon McCarthy from Chicago and Oakland? And if Brigham is better than Loux, why would the Cubs trade him back to us?

This move was made in good faith. Brigham has a higher ceiling than Loux, even though he's destined for a relief role as compared to Loux who's more of a swingman. Starters have more value than relievers. If both players were at full health, there's no way this trade would have been made. So to say it has "nothing" to do with an injury is false. It has everything to do with an injury, which is why it happened.

Eric, you keep posting all the reasons you see as behind this trade, and missing the big one: the 40-man roster issue.

Did the elbow strain directly play a role? Maybe, maybe not. It's true that when Brigham was shut down a few weeks early, the Rangers expressed a wilingness to readdress the Soto trade after the season if the Cubs felt there was some sort of "damaged goods" issue. But subsequent to that, they determined that no surgery was needed so there's no guarantee that the once-hurting elbow was really an issue here.

Indirectly, it could have played a role. The early shutdown incontrovertibly prevented the Cubs from getting their own experience with him, if nothing else, and perhaps made them that much less willing to squeeze out 40-man space for him.

And that's the real motivation here. Brigham has a higher ceiling, but the Cubs had to let go of someone from their 40-man roster to protect their most valued commodities from the Rule 5 draft, so it was that roster squeeze that precipitated the trade of the higher-ceilinged Brigham (a player they barely knew anyhow) for a lower-ceilinged Loux-plus-PTBNL that wouldn't take up any space on their 40-man list.

if you have a bit of conspiracy theorist in you, there's also a possibility that the trade sending Brigham to the Cubs was always and only about the 40-man roster. Perhaps the Rangers and Cubs agreed from the outset for Chicago to take the 40-man-rostered Brigham (opening up a roster slot for Soto at the time) and then send him back after the season for something different when the Rangers would have plenty of 40-man room. If that's the case, the "injury" (such as it was) may have been overblown for effect - - and it wouldn't be the first time MLB teams did that sort of deal

Erik be my boy!!

Shit Eric, get help man.

Maybe you are in a bad situation or something. There are people who will help you if you just reach out to them.

Acfually, itz called a "CYA Buddy Trade". A good business deal between friends, Theo & JD.