Of course we will never know if the outcome would have been different if the Cubs had acquired Verlander. But do you believe the Cubs would have beaten the Dodgers with Verlander pitching for them this season?

_________________
God is the uncaused cause of the universe. He had no beginning and has no end. He is not bound by the laws of the universe he created.

The Cubs were lucky to beat the Nationals and weren't going to beat any other team in the postseason with the way the offense was playing. I do not believe Verlander changes that. The Cubs were simply not one of the best teams in the postseason.

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.

No, but we would still have Eloy in hand had we went after Verlander. Verlander was my preferred choice. He was lightning it up mid 90s again this year..found the fountain of youth.

Verlander is only a year older than Scherzer or Lester.

_________________

Lotta mileage on that arm though.


Hopefully Idiot Epstein spends the savings he got on Quintana vs Verlander wisely

They would have had a better chance had they had Verlander going in one or two of these games, but the offense/bullpen would have had to produce.

Is your question moreso about which pitcher you would have traded the prospects for? It's hard to argue the value they get in Quntana, given the contract and quality he brings, but I do wonder what they would had Verlander started pitching the way he has earlier in the season.