Cubs Rumor Thread: Deadline day is here

Cubs Rumor Thread: Deadline day is here

UPDATE 3:05 PM: Am told the Cubs worked hard down the stretch but no deal was made.  Teams simply not offering value, overvaluing prospects and Cubs just weren't motivated to accept anything less than surplus value.

The Cubs did make 5 deals before the non-waiver deadline and, in my opinion, did better on the return for both Scott Feldman and Matt Garza than any other team did for their pitchers.

The Cubs can still make waiver deadline deals but those players must first pass through waivers and there is little chance that guys like Schierholtz, Russell, DeJesus, or even Navarro will pass through unclaimed.  Gregg is an outside shot but interest seemed to wane of late, so I wouldn't expect much of a return.

UPDATE 2:54 PM: Ken Rosenthal tweets that momentum has slowed on a Navarro deal to the Cards. Cubs have high asking price per Rosenthal.

UPDATE 2:34 PM: A couple of non-Cubs deal get done. Bud Norris gets traded to the Orioles for L.J. Hoes who is actually a pretty good hitter with plate discipline. The problem is he's a tweener --probably a corner OF'er with virtually no HR power. If he taps into his, the could be a starter (or if Astros think he can stay in CF), but otherwise he's an extra OFer.   They also received LHP Josh Hader and a competitive balance pick.  Decent, but I thought they'd get more.

The Royals traded undersized but hard-throwing RHP Kyle Smith to the Astros for Justin Maxwell. Smith might be a longshot to be a starter, but I have to say that's a nice return for a guy who is essentially a 4th or 5th OFer.

UPDATE 2:25 PM: A funny take on the deadline from Kim DeJesus who is, of course, the wife of David DeJesus. She tweets "42 minutes" and this video...

Neither she nor David want to leave... and we're not so anxious to see that either.

UPDATE 2:13 PM: Dioner Navarro deal sounding like a real possibility and is getting closer.  Nick Cafardo says Schierholtz staying with Cubs but I was just told that possibility is not completely ruled out yet.

UPDATE 1:50 PM: Scratch Jeff Samardzija off your trade list.  Cubs are no longer entertaining any offers.  All talks are officially dead.

UPDATE 1:15: The Diamondbacks have traded Ian Kennedy to the Padres for LH RP Joe Thatcher, RHP prospect Matt Stites, and a comp draft pick.  Looks like he sold low after all.  Wow.  Trading young, talented SPs for RPs down the stretch?  I just got harrowing flashbacks to the Ed Lynch days.

UPDATE 12:37 PM: Bruce Levine now says that James Russell is getting a lot more action than Kevin Gregg, which should surprise nobody.  The Cubs, of course, would prefer to deal Gregg but now may wait until August.

UPDATE 12:32 PM: Hardball Talk suggests that the Reds have had some interest in James Russell.

UPDATE 12:31 PM: According to multiple media reports, Ian Kennedy may be going to the Padres for a package of relievers.  I would presume that would include Luke Gregerson.  The Padres are also looking to deal Huston Street, though he's not as highly sought after.  Jeff Passan of Yahoo suggests that Joe Thatcher is part of the deal.

UPDATE 11:51 AM: A lot of chatter and the picture for the Cubs is beginning to clear.  Hearing there are as many as 4 players still in play.  All could conceivably be dealt in the right situation.

UPDATE 10:55 AM: Have been told that the Pirates "are really in" on Nate Schierholtz.

UPDATE 10:52 AM: Ken Rosenthal reports that the Cardinals are indeed looking for a catcher after all with the injury to Yadier Molina.  Dioner Navarro makes a lot of sense, though I haven't heard anything regarding the Cubs backup catcher to this point.

UPDATE 10:43 AM: For those that missed me on The Score 670 last night, a reminder that I’ll be on Chicagoland Radio tonight with Jason Thomas in a 24-hour radio show to raise money for the Jarrett Payton Foundation. Tune in at 12:20 if you are an insomniac like I am.  Hopefully I don't crash into a muttering heap by then.

UPDATE: 10:23 AM: Hearing that the Rays are showing interest in David DeJesus. This makes a lot of sense as they are looking for a bat and DeJesus fits their profile with good on-base skills. He's also cheap, controlled for next year, and won't cost as much as Schierholtz.

Also want to not for those who thought maybe Barney would be going to the Tigers.  I think the acquisition of Iglesias puts an end to that thought.  They are basically the same player in that they are defensively oriented with a limited bat.  Iglesias is a SS and could bump Peralta to 2B or he could conceivably play 2B if needed as well.

We start with an interesting bit we just heard in that Arizona wasn't really selling all that low on Ian Kennedy. In fact, they used him as the center of a package in a misguided attempt to get Jeff Samardzija.

The clearly misinterpreted the Cubs signal here in that they must have believed the Cubs were in some sort of panic mode about signing Samardzija -- even though they have him for 2+ more years and there is still a good relationship between the two parties.

The Cubs only said they would listen on Samardzija and the truth was they'd have to be blown away with at least two top prospects to consider a deal and one of those prospects had to be Archie Bradley.

There is also lots of interest today in Nate Schierholtz, which you already knew, but interest has also perked up in David DeJesus. In fact, it's quite possible that the Cubs deal both outfielders with Junior Lake, Ryan Sweeney, and Bryan Bogusevic all expected to be on the roster for next season at this time. The Cubs may need to make a decision on Brett Jackson this year as well.

Could be an interesting day, so follow us as always as we try to deliver you original stuff early and often...

Filed under: Uncategorized


Leave a comment
  • fb_avatar

    If they trade both of those guys the production from the remaining OF'ers would be horrendous.

  • In reply to Just Win:

    but the draft pick will be nice.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Holy Cattle:

    Yes, the draft pick will be significantly better if they deal both guys, but the games will be very hard to watch.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Just Win:

    The games are already tough to watch. We are not going anywhere this year. Any and all trades should be explored.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Just Win:

    They would likely trade one of them, not both. Also, isn't Sweeney a free agent next year?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Just Win:

    OT factoid and not in response to anyone in particular, but just added it up and 23 of the Cubs 58 losses this year were one-run losses.

  • In reply to Just Win:

    Yes. If they move either of those two guys and especially both, I have to expect they'll pick up an OF'er this offseason. Can't go with that group.

  • Is Sweeney not going to get enough service time in this year to make it to free agency? I know it would be close.

  • In reply to The Cubs Way:

    Sweeney came in with 5.053 years of service time, so he would have had to spend most of the year up to hit 6.

  • Schierholtz and Dejesus? Tank mode.....engage.

  • In reply to Ike03:

    You have to think the FO was unsettled by that sweep of SF. Better start moving the production and slide down into that #3 draft spot.

  • Is Arizona nuts?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to peoria cubfan:

    Yep. You remember that time they gave us two 17 year old pitchers for Tony Campana?!

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Zachary Myers:

    And you know what's sad: if the Cubs HAD traded Shark for a Kennedy package, the "Standing Ovation at the Cubs Convention" crowd would have been much less upset about the Shark trade than they were about the Campana trade.

  • If Schierholtz is traded to Pittsburg, I'd love that competitive balance pick. Would allow them to sign a type A free agent and have some draft pick cover.

    If Dejesus is traded, are the Cubs allowed to sign him without any sort of penalty in the off season?

  • In reply to Ike03:

    There are no type A free agents anymore. Only guys that were given a qualifying offer and guys that aren't.

    And DeJesus has an option year that will almost definitely be exercised by the acquiring team. If the acquiring team were to decline that option, the Cubs can sign him in the offseason with no penalty.

  • In reply to TulaneCubs:

    You're right, that is what I meant. Players that turn down QO's

  • If Arizona was offering Kennedy as a centerpiece for Samardzija that seems bizarre, let's offer Gregg for Bradley.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Abe Froman:

    I like the way you talk.

  • The Cubs still need international slot money to officially sign Eloy Jimenez. I'd look for a minor deal (or two) to give them the money to sign him.

    The Trade Deadline is generally one of my favorite days of the year (as well as the NHL deadline), unfortunately, it seems as if it is getting worse and worse each year. Hopefully there's plenty of deals left to be completed - both the expected and the surprises.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Stevo:

    The IFA money is irrelevant now. They are in max-penalty territory regardless I believe.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    No, it will help to acquire some before they sign Eloy. They're not locked into max-penalty yet.

  • In reply to Quedub:

    They are still linked to Molina & Encarcion. Also teams can only trade for 50% more than there original IFA total.

    So chances are that the Cubs will blow their budget, unless they can trade for slot $$ AND convince Molina/Encarcion etc. to wait until next year before signing their contract... ala Armando Rivera, but I don't see 16 year old kids doing that.

  • fb_avatar

    DDJ isn't going anywhere? Kimmie and her bff will see to that. ;)

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Hahaha...and she's twitter"s finest humble bragger.

  • If that D-Bax thing is true, what in the hell are they thinking? Ian Kennedy sucks by every metric out there, including the old eye test. He doesnt have one plus pitch, and is an automatic three runs per start and that is his absolute best. He is so average, pitchers like him flood the free agent market every year. I would rather Jake Arrieta 100/100 times, and we got him for Scott Feldman!!! I cannot believe they would assume the Cubs would consider that. Are they in an alternate reality?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Josh Sims:

    Are they in an alternate reality?


    Well it is Arizona :)

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Josh Sims:

    Far too close to Area 51 apparently.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Josh Sims:

    Kennedy won 36 games the last 2 seasons. Samarhgftygd has never even won 1o games in a season.Kennedy is having an awful year but the guy has been good before. You do not win 21 games in one season with an ERA under 3 unless you are pretty darn Ian Stewart and Ian Kennedy were team mates in High School.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ironman McGinnity:

    Your comments are misleading. Samarz hasn't been a starter for a full season, or for a decent team for that matter. Pitching for a good team and having a whole lot of good fortune (2011), doesn't mean that Kennedy is in the same zip code as a pitcher. Kennedy doesn't have another season with 10 wins and an ERA under 4...that screams that 2011 was an "outlier" statistically.

  • Schierholtz s arbitration eligible after this season while DeJesus just has a team option for next year. So, technically, if they are traded, the team receiving them could get them for two years if so desired.

  • fb_avatar

    Any buzz on Castro being available or any eyes on Barney to open up 2nd for Watkins or Alcantara

  • In reply to Jorge Soler:

    castro? really?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to cubsker:

    You can't blame him for being frustrated after last night though trading him may be a little harsh. His value is too low right now to trade him.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    we aren't trading castro, we aren't trading castro, we aren't trading castro. repeat as many times as needed.

  • In reply to cubsker:

    You can add Samardzija to that mantra. Can we be all done with the nonsense? It would be more productive to discuss whether or not the sun will explode today (about as probable as trading Castro or Samardzija today).

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cubswin4harry:

    It's not complete nonsense to trade-speculate on Samardzija if teams are inquiring and/or making offers. It is unlikely, but better guys have been traded at the deadline in the past.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    If you can find me examples of a major-market team trading a front-line starter who has not yet reached their free-agent years, and I may change my mind.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cubswin4harry:

    How far back in time do you want me to go?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cubswin4harry:

    Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, Curt Schilling right off the top of my head. Cliff Lee, more than once. Jake Peavy to the White Sox.

  • In reply to Cubswin4harry:


    Randy Johnson traded by the Expos? Not what I would call a major-market team. They were the Marlins before the Marlins became the Marlins. He was also essentially a prospect. Randy Johnson was an impending FA when the Mariners traded him.

    Pedro Martinez - see above for Expos comment. Also was an impending FA.

    Curt Schilling - spend 8 years in Philly before DEMANDING a trade.

    Cliff Lee - was a prospect when he was originally traded. I think we can all agree that Cleveland is not a major market. Plus he spent 7 years there, so I'm assuming he was in his FA years, but I haven't looked it up because Clevelend is a payroll bottom dweller.

    Jake Peavy: doen't meet either qualifiacation. He was on a Free Agent contract when he was traded, way past arbirtration years. Also, San Diego consistently battles Kansas City, Tampa Bay, and the Pirates for lowest payroll.

    Point being, teams don't trade high quality pitching assets unless money is a constraint, or the player is disgruntled.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to cubsker:

    I never said the Cubs were trading Castro.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    I know, I was responding to Soler who asked about castro rumors. might as well ask about what the word on a miggy trade is.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to cubsker:

    Miggy not in lineup today. Anyone wanna run with that one lol?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Jorge Soler:

    Barney has been so bad this year, his value has to be at an all-time low. So unless they want to trade him for another buy low guy, like Ian Kennedy, perhaps, I doubt they would trade him today. Maybe in the off-season there would be a better market and teams would think he could get a fresh start.

    (and I don't think Arizona is interested in a 2b)

  • If I had to choose between DDJ & Nate, I'd rather see DDJ go. I like DDJ's veteran presence and his quality AB's. But we would miss Nate's Power much more, IMO. Plus, he is young enough to be part of a contending team by 2016, etc... But I'd expect Nate to bring the best return so...

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    I would personally like to see them both go but only because I want .300/30/100 guys playing RF on my team, not .260/20/65 guys.

    I do like Schierholtz though because he is an underdog guy that you root for, but the Cubs have had guys like that since time immemorial, Mike Vail types that are starters just because there is nobody better available. He is a 4th OF at best who is playing above his head in a thin market but on the flip side I am not sure the offers exist that make it worth moving him - maybe PIT overpays.

    Then again, there may not be anybody to replace him and if the Cubs move both the OF could be really ugly through next year. I'd really like to be buyers instead of sellers next year. It would be nice to be of the point of view where I devalue incoming guys (devalue meaning the Cubs pay less) instead of outgoing guys (where the Cubs don't get as much as everybody expects for their players).

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    I agree with your valuation of Nate. I just meant that we would miss his bat in the line-up more than we would DDJ. I'd be okay with moving them both, but we would have to sign a FA rather than go with Sweeney/Bogs/Lake/Bourbon?Gillespie/Sappelt..... Although I think we've cornered the market on 4th OF's...

    Unfortunately, we don't have any .300/30/100 guys in the pipeline for 2014...

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    Couple years away. I think Bryant is that guy, though .300 is a big, probably unreachable stretch. But if you can get .300+ from Almora I am ok with .260/30/100 from Bryant. If Rizzo can snap out of it, the 3-4-5 of Olt/Bryant/Rizzo is fascinatingly scary. Add Soler to that with Almora in the 2-hole - the potential is unreal. Watch out '27 Yankees.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Canter:

    Personally I don't see Olt as ever being a #3 hitter. He'll never hit for enough average...I see him as more of a 5-6 guy in a good lineup at his ceiling. But, point taken on how scary that lineup could be!

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    No Baez? Unless he's traded, he should arrive before Bryant, Soler, or Almora.

    But yes, "if" they all make it... we will have a "murderers row" type of line-up for years to come. :keepourfingerscrossed:

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    Actually choked on Baez. Knew I was missing somebody. Wow, yeah Baez will look good in that lineup, ya think? Lol.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    I know this is nuts, but I'm starting to think that Almora might pass Baez. No disrespect meant to either one, but Almora is so polished and Baez still relatively raw.

  • In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    Who does? How many of those guys even exist?

  • In reply to JasonB:

    Albert Pujols in 2006 and Miggy today. No one else comes close, even with Chris Davis unreal ist half.

  • In reply to JasonB:

    In 2012, 7 players hit .300 with 30 HRs - none of them play right field. One of them has been suspended for steroids. Three of these guys are butchers defensively


    .300/30 guys don't grow on trees

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to JasonB:

    Jeez...... .300/30/100 is a generalization. If the guy hit .285 and hit 43 HR and drove in 128 RBI would you disqualify him? My God. Lighten up.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    My point is that making this statement is placing unnecessarily high expectations on the offensive production from this position. Guys that can produce those types of numbers are few and far between.

    Maybe if you lower the expectations slightly you can add another 5-8 guys to the list? So we have 15 players tops in all of baseball who can produce these numbers - that's one for every two teams. How many of those guys could be competent RFs? 5? Maybe?

    All of the guys I listed above were uber prospects, with the exception of McCutchen, who was merely a top 10. For as great as our offensive prospect pipeline is right now, we still may not have a guy capable of this type of production. These numbers are reserved for guys going to Cooperstown.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to JasonB:

    I just said I wanted a guy with that potential over a 4th OF like Schierholtz. I never said they grow on trees or that they're readily available. I even lowered my expectations in making a case for Kris Bryant, who is likely a .260/30/100 guy. You ran with all the assumptions and data. Also, I can give you a long list of guys who had more than one .300/30/100 season and never made the HOF, even leaving out steroid era players.

    By the way, on your list, only Cabrera is a true butcher and he is playing out of position anyway. Certainly it is not a list of gold glovers, excepting Beltre, but those guys are all more than adequate.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    Oh and I certainly get your point. Obviously, all things being equal, you would rather have a guy who is better offensively. I just think your expectations of the offensive output from the position are a bit high.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to JasonB:

    See above.

  • In reply to JasonB:

    So Prince Fielder is a slick fielding 1B now? And while Braun gas gotten better, he still isn't great and ironically, this whole steroid thing came out after his ISO dipped to .190.

    I could care less if a guy hits .300/20 or .260/30. They're both giving me the same offensive value. And you can point out all the .300/30 guys you want, they're still few and far between.

  • In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    I'd rather keep David Dejesus and grab another table setter in free agency. The Cubs lead the league in extra base hits but don't score because no one is ever on base.

  • The Cubs needed to keep Samardzija. At some point you have to move from acquiring talent to actually fielding talent at the Major League level. Trading Samardzija for "can't miss" prospects is still trading for prospects and you never know what can happen. Also I think Shark has earned the right to stay with this team, if he wants to. He worked his ass off to be a starter after having some good to middling seasons as a reliever and really struggling for a while. If the Cubs wanted to start spending this offseason they could and probably get some guys who could help them maybe sniff around a wild card in 2014.

  • In reply to jorel1114:

    RE: "At some point you have to move from acquiring talent to actually fielding talent at the Major League level."

    Ugghh. I am so TIRED of this argument. It seems like every day some random comes on here to post this same crap.

    Yes, at some point a team needs to keep it's talent, but that time is not NOW. Unless the Front Office considers the players as part of our core going forward, i.e. Castro & Rizzo who they just signed to long term deals, then they should be exploring every possibility to exchange assets for more value in the near future.

    We have a killer front office running this organization now. I know many Cubs fans are not accustomed to it because of the hacks & yes men that the corporations who owned the Cubs in the past hired to run the baseball operations.

    I want Theo/Jed to have a chance to establish a deep talent base for the system going forward. We will NOT have this chance again. Once we start winning, the plan is to be perennial contenders. I know this confuses some as they are use to us contending one year, and then sucking for five.

    That is not to say that I want them to trade Samardzija, but I trust that IF they do, it will be very worth while to do so.

  • Would either of those two guys (by themselves) really bring us back anything of near value for next year that could be counted on for the 25 man roster?

    Looking at FA this offseason, I really don't see us going for Ellsbury (too expensive and maybe paying for past performance) and Choo (who is very similar to Schierholtz although he will be expensive also) who will probably be kept by Cincy. Other than those two players, not much is out there for outfield help that upgrades us from what we already have now with DDJ and Nate S.

    Like John has said many times here before, I feel we would be better off keeping both guys for next year, unless someone blows us away with an incredible offer.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to DetroitCubFan:

    I keep reading how there is very little offensive talent available for trade, so maybe we could get a decent prospect back for either guy. If we can't get at least one solid prospect back each I don't see any reason to trade either guy.

  • In reply to DetroitCubFan:

    I don't think Ellsbury is going to be as expensive as you think. Look at what Bourn just received. I think Ellsbury will get more than that, but not a bunch more than that. I don't think teams will want to give up a 1st round pick to sign him to a huge deal which eliminates 66% of the teams from the market.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ike03:

    But if you take away the one MVP-caliber season, other than being a SB threat, Ellsbury won't be worth the money he commands/demands.

    PLUS, Bourn was handcuffed by the qualifying offer so a 1st round pick was tied to him as compensation, which lowered his market value considerably. Not sure what the status of Ellsbury is.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    Ellsbury will be qualified by Boston for sure which he will almost certainly turn down. I don't think Ellsbury will get the money you think he will. He's not getting Carl Crawford money or anything close to it.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ike03:

    I agree. My point is only that Ellsbury will ask for and get more than he is worth.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ike03:

    Agreed, and they should have the money to pay for an FA hitter like that next year since the starters are pretty deep.

  • John .... the start of paragraph 2 needs to be fixed. Missing a 'y.'

    I think the Cubs would be best served to move Jackson under that 'change of scenery' theory. I just can't see him fitting the 'Cubs way' mold.

  • Great job as usual, John. I'm sure it's been mentioned, but today's deadline is 3 p.m. Chicago Standard Time.

  • OT, but Castro holds the seventh highest dWAR (defensive Wins Above Replacement) in baseball at 2.1. That, by the way, is the highest among all catchers in the league.

    He started off on fire offensively, then disappeared. He's hitting better of late, but I was surprised to see his defensive metrics so solid.

  • In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    BEEF... not Castro... Castillo as in Wellington "Beef" Castillo

    Stupid Auto-correct! lol

  • I think they should trade Dejesus, even if it's for a package like the one they got for Campana. He'll get 5 mil next year unless the exercise the buyout, and he's not worth that. In fact, Sweeney is a better player than him at this point, and they could probably sign Sweeney for next year for about 1.5 mil or so.

    I think Sweeney is a better player than a lot of people realize. He posted a combined 740 OPS in Oakland over his age 23-25 seasons, then struggled with some injuries the next two seasons and posted some disappointing numbers. But a 740 in Oakland is like a 780 or so in Wrigley--and that was before he hit his prime. He has shown that he's back to form this year, and probably capable of a 780+ OPS in Chicago. His CF defense is solid, he has looked good in clutch situations, and he has fared decently against LHP.

    Dejesus, on the other hand, is eking out a 750 OPS on the strength of not having to face LHP. He's going to be 34 next year, and at this point is really nothing more than a decent 4th OF/platoon guy. He's not really a true CFer anymore, and he barely even has the bat for CF facing only RHP.

    Either Dejesus or Sweeney would be okay as a 4th OFer, but Sweeney also makes for a decent stopgap starter there until someone else is ready to take over. Seeing Lake play has been exciting, but it would be foolish to pencil him in as a starter for 2014 without some kind of backup plan. What I would do is try to re-sign Sweeney for CF, sign Choo for LF, platoon Valbuena and Barney at 2B, and let Olt/Lake/Vitters battle for the 3B job. If Sweeney falters and both Lake and one of the other 3Bmen look MLB ready, move Lake to CF and make Sweeney the 4th OF.

    If they deal Schierholtz, they need to get something really good in return (like Schierholtz + Gregg for Glasnow or something like that). Otherwise, it's not worth it for the Cubs. They already are thin in the OF corners going into next year, and Lake is unlikely to provide the offensive production you want from a corner OFer--at least in 2014.

  • DeJesus has become my favorite player on the team with his OBP and good at bats. But I do agree that if we can get something good for him then we should trade him.

  • Rozner on the radio just now was definitive that Schierholtz is moving.

  • Think we could get a Jeff Ames type arm from Rays for DDJ?

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    Seems possible

  • I am watching the enthusiasm from a distance as to how the future Cubs team that is beginning to take form at the lower levels and must caution the younger crowd that most, if not all, of these prognostications will not pan out.

    OK to drool a bit, but need to keep a safe distance from getting into full fledged man love, as baseball is just too hard and there are so many variables that will prevent prospects from turning into high performing major league contributors.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to JK1969:


  • Jayson Stark ‏@jaysonst 19m
    Likelihood is growing that #Pirates won't do anything today & see what's out there in August, according to several teams talking with them

    This was less than 10 minutes before John's's almost like teams are trying to send mixed signals or something.

  • I'm always in fuck the Cardinals mode, especially when it involves Yadier Molina. So again, fuck the Cardinals. I'd rather trade Dioner Navarro for a sack of used baseballs than trade him to the Cardinals.

  • In reply to jorel1114:

    unless they give up a nice piece then no, Shoppach most likely will go there.

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    I would never trade with the Cardinals because I don't trust them to actually give up anything they'd want to part with.

  • I listened to 670 last night John, first time hearing your voice lol!
    very informative and articulate... as always, you da man!

    Shierholtz and DDJ are so good for a contending team, we should be able to get some to 10-20 prospects in my eyes, they can easily be the missing piece to a Championship run

  • Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 4m
    Remember yesterday when @jonmorosi and I said that virtually all of the #Rangers were in play? List includes the newly acquired Matt Garza.


  • fb_avatar
    In reply to North Side Irish:

    Watch him go to the Pirates for Taillon or ARZ for Bradley. Ouch. And I'm just kidding. He's still a rental.

  • K Sean Packard, CPA ‏@AthleteTax 16m
    MLB players traded in-season get $850, $1,150 or $1,450 moving reimbursement depending on distance. Traded NHLers get $4K/mo for up to 6 mos


  • In reply to TulaneCubs:

    Talks still fluid except for Samardzija. Those are dead per my latest update.

  • fb_avatar

    Phil Rogers still saying Jeff Samardzija to the Pirates for a sizable return package is a heavy play. Maybe I am secretly Phil Rogers...........hmmm?

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    Phil Rogers has been displaying Alzheimer-like symptoms for years. He should probably get checked out now. Oh wait, he just wants more click-thru's on his articles so that's why he writes non-sensical articles like that.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Cubswin4harry:

    He gets paid the same regardless and he doesn't seem to be one of baseball's go guys. A guy you should all read if you are looking at things from a Pirates perspective on possible deals for the Cubs outfielders and Samardzija is James Santelli.

    He gets tons of respect in the community. Later.

  • Does anybody get the feeling that Samardzija would be gone if the DB's say the word "Bradley"?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to TobaccopouchinIvy:

    I actually think the Ian Kennedy offer was a false leak to get other teams to lower offers. I hate conspiracies, but if Kevin Towers really offered Ian Kennedy for Jeff Samardzija he may need to be cheked for signs of senility or severe drug addiction. No way he made that offer. That's a big FU to the Cubs if he did, he's basically calling our FO the village idiots. Not that Kennedy can't be good, but he's basically a reclamation project as is.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    He may have been part of the deal with the intent to lower the return on prospects. To me, any offer for Samardzija that didn't include Skaggs or Bradley is an insult.

  • In reply to TobaccopouchinIvy:


  • I think Dale would cry if Shark is traded, he def has a bromance w him...

  • fb_avatar

    He's a bulldog on the mound. He's definitely the kind of competitor that a manager/coach likes to fill their rotation with. If I was Dale, I would cry too if Shark got moved. I understand the rebuild, etc, but competitors like Shark don't come along every day. His intangible value is immeasurable y'all.

  • In reply to Andrue Weber:

    it really depends how much Shark is going to demand money wise for me, if he wants more than atleast 13mpy then I say trade him for top prospects

  • fb_avatar

    I'm not against trading Russell simply for the reason Sveum has no clue how to get the best matchups with him.

  • fb_avatar

    This is going down as one of the all-time letdown Deadline Days.

  • fb_avatar

    Blow it up!

    Short term assets don't have much point if you don't create long term value with them.

    Move DDJ, Schierholtz, Gregg, Russell, Navarro...move em all!

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    Two from starting rotation, two top relievers, backup catcher, and the starting outfield! Back up the truck!

  • The haul wouldn't be as big as for a starter, but there's a history of deadline overpays for middle relief. Garland for Karchner is the bar-setter here. I'm a little hopeful where Russell is concerned.

  • fb_avatar

    Also, I have a feeling that Ellsbury is coming to the Cubs.

    I don't like it but he's Theo's guy.
    God I hope we don't give up a pick for him.

  • fb_avatar

    You know you've achieved social media notoriety when a person who posts to this blog blocks you on Twitter. At least now I know who sent me the scathing e-mail two weeks ago though. Makes perfect sense and it all adds up. I am a Pepsi guy after all.

    And for taking all the fun out of it I will quietly walk away now. It has been real fun hanging out with most of you and I love the intelligent conversations. Best, Michael.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Canter:


    If someone here is causing you problems, email John. Don't walk away because of some idiot.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    Double Huh?
    Agree with Just Win don't walk away because of some idiot. I like what you have to say even though I don't comment much. Usually when I do think about throwing something out there you beat me to it and say it much better than I can.

  • Arizona trades Kennedy for relief pitching, what in the world are they thinking?

  • fb_avatar

    It's almost eerily quiet, like something big may happen in the next hour & a half.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Andrue Weber:

    The big name baseball guys on Twitter aren't even reporting anything interesting, just the same names from all the teams we've heard. Pretty slow day.

  • deals will get announced right at deadline to keep rivals from having time to react. watch .

  • Is this our last hour with Kim?

  • In reply to Holy Cattle:

    Tim Brown ‏@TBrownYahoo 1m
    Gotta say, the best thing about this trade deadline has been @KimDeJesus9.

    She's gone national...

  • Nick Cafardo ‏@nickcafardo 43s
    Looks like Nate Schierholz staying put with Cubs

    Consider the source...

  • Cliff Lippert ‏@Cliffy46405 2m
    Internet rumor: Dbacks offered Ian Kennedy to the Cubs for Russell, Watkins and Taylor Scott. The Cubs declined.

  • I'm calling bush league on that Kennedy-to-Cubs offer.

    I think we might see one more Cub dealt before the deadline and then we'll call it a day. The Cubs could certainly deal players in August, however. I think that is more likely.

  • I just joined twitte a few days ago so I don't know if this is a reliable source or not...

    Cliff Lippert‏@Cliffy464056m
    Internet Rumor: The Pirates have just put James Taillon on the table for Smarj. Prior that he was not available

  • Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 15s
    Sources: #Orioles agree to acquire Norris from #Astros for Hoes and another piece. Finalizing now.

  • In reply to North Side Irish:

    Laughing at the wording on that twitter report, but trying to keep it clean here. There are impressionable minds around.

  • In reply to StillMissKennyHubbs:

    Lots of jokes on Twitter about the other piece being money, cash...Keith Law said he'd choose Bros...etc.

  • fb_avatar

    Dayton Moore is the most inept general manager in the league. No one else is even close.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    This. Two years of James Shields for 15 years of Wil Myers. Wow.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to notcarlosdanger:

    It's not as extreme in terms of value of either player, but Kyle Smith for Justin Maxwell is equally idiotic.

  • Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 53s
    Told #STLCards’ pursuit of #Cubs’ Navarro has slowed. Teams unable to agree on price. Deal appears doubtful.

  • Jon Heyman ‏@JonHeymanCBS 14s
    #cardinals won't be getting dioner navarro. wouldnt give up anything of value. #cubs

  • JonHeymanCBS: #cardinals won't be getting dioner navarro. wouldnt give up anything of value. #cubs

  • Jon Heyman ‏@JonHeymanCBS 54s
    #cardinals won't be getting dioner navarro. wouldnt give up anything of value. #cubs

  • Dayton Moore is just what owner and nickel-slinger David Glass wants -- a bargain-basement mentality. That's why they cling to AAAA guys like Chris Getz, Mitch Maier, and now Maxwell.
    In other news:
    Dayton Moore leaves office w/ trade calls on hold on Trading Deadline day. "Got what we need for our stretch run; besides, men's underwear is Blue-Lite Special at K-Mart till 5 pm today."

  • Bob Nightengale ‏@BNightengale 1m
    The #Pirates aren't meeting the #Cubs demands for their outfielders and doubt trade will be made in waning minutes

  • Cubs seem to not be in a hurry to give away players with team control. I like it.

  • UPDATE 1:50 PM: Scratch Jeff Samardzija off your trade list. Cubs are no longer entertaining any offers. All talks are officially dead. Yippie!

  • Perhaps the lack of deals means says something about how the FO feels about next year. "So you're saying there's a chance"

  • Would've liked to have seen another move or 2 today but glad they're not gonna give players away for nothing of value in return. Overall a pretty boring day, not much trading going on...

  • fb_avatar

    I am disappoint.

  • fb_avatar

    I can't picture Gregg making it through waivers, he signed a minor lg deal with both the Dodgers and then Cubs when Dodgers released him. He can't be making much money. Too many teams need RP help to think a solid vet around league minimum gets through waivers.

  • fb_avatar

    I'm very glad they stuck to their guns. They really improved the organization with the deals they made. Additionally, I think we have a reasonably competitive team for the 2nd half. The games will be much more entertaining to watch IMO.

  • fb_avatar

    That was more like the NFL trade deadline. Justin Maxwell? Yawn....

  • fb_avatar

    Honestly pretty happy with how this shook out. We got a number of excellent prospects in the Feldman and Garza deals. The big pieces we didn't trade -- DDJ, Schierholtz, Russell -- can either help next year or be moved over the winter to teams frustrated with lack of impact FA.

    Grimm and Arrieta give us good arms close to the bigs, Edwards is further back, but an unbelievable ceiling. (Speaking of which, what would it take to sign the scout that found him?)

    Really very happy.

  • Obviously, Kim's limo wasn't driving on Chicago's streets, otherwise she would be wearing that champagne.

  • That's it on the trade deadline day? wow talk about ending with a whimper

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to carolinacub:

    CBA biting hard. Makes drafting and development absolutely critical. Changing the CBA would help, too.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    Unfortunately, this pushes the rebuild farther back.

    And I hate to say it, but it makes the Astros rebuild look that much smarter.

    All the short term assets we've picked up that we're now unable to generate long-term value from has negatively impacted our own rebuild effort.

  • In reply to Giffmo:


  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    Disagree. We got the best return of any single player for Garza. Arrieta for Feldman was pretty nice -- especially considering other players that were moved. And DDJ and Schierholtz can still be traded. We were one of the big winners at the deadline.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    Garza was not acquired as a short term asset.

    I liked the Garza trade (although we'd still be better off if it never happened).

    Feldman was a savy pickup because there's always a demand for SP.

    But the other players were picked up to try to turn them into long term value.

    If we couldn't find value for DDJ & Scierholtz now, they'll have far less value next year as rentals.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    There were offers on the table for both. But we passed on them because Theo wants to be competitive next year, and a RF with the second highest OPS in baseball helps with that. As does a true top of the order hitter.

    We can also trade them this winter. FA market will be incredibly thin, perhaps opening up opportunities.

    The Astros plan to compete in 3+ years and their moves reflect that. The Cubs are playing like a team that expects to challenge for a WC next year.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    That is such a loaf of BS. The whole expecting to be competitive thing is just P.R.

    If we really expected to compete, we would not have traded a guy some argue was our best pitcher.

    We wouldn't even have listened for a moment on Shark

    We would not have traded our BA and HR leader.

    We wouldn't have been shopping a pretty good closer and LH reliever.

    We wouldn't have been shopping a switch hitting catcher that's been on fire.

    These are not moves made by teams with WS aspirations.

    Also, Shierholtz's OPS is nice when you conveniently forget to mention he strictly a platoon player.

    Half of our team is a platoon job and we've set team records for players on the active roster.

    Let's please stop the fantasy that we're contenders.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    Strongly disagree. This is spin too. Just the other direction. You always listen if you think that you can improve your team. The Cubs never came close to trading Shark and weren't about to settle for anything but top prospects.

    And trading Garza, Soriano is trading guys that just weren't going to be here or be major factors. Gregg is not a pretty good closer. He's an average relief pitcher who has had a good results in an overrated role. And shopping a backup catcher at peak value isn't going to hurt the team long term.

    And you'll notice they didn't trade a lot of these guys because they didn't get the surplus value they wanted. You're always trying to add value and you should listen on everyone. The only guys the Cubs were "shopping" were Soriano and the guys not signed beyond this season. They were approached on everyone else and listened -- but didn't make a deal for guys they were only going to have for one more year.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    What John said, with an addition: you denigrate Schierholtz as a platoon player.

    Anthony Rizzo has 455 PAs.
    Schierholtz has 320.

    So, Schierholtz has roughly 70% of the PAs that Rizzo does. That performance is pretty significant to the overall performance of the team.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    The fact remains. They at least tried to sell and sell A LOT.

    Winners buy.

    You say "you always listen if you can improve your team" but winners don't improve by trading some if their strongest players.

    The Cards are not listening on Wainwright and Miller.

    Boston is not listening on Pedroia and Ortiz.

    And you can mitigate the strengths of the players were being offered. That's fine.

    And it would work if they had anything at all behind those guys. But it took half the season to stumble into a guy even as OK as Gregg.

    The other players aren't exactly being made irrelevant by better players either..

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    "Trying" would be an inaccurate description. They never said they wanted to trade those guys. At the same time you have to give yourself an opportunity. For example, if someone asks for Samardzija and you say, "Skaggs and Bradley", you're not really trying. You know they're not going to take it, but it doesn't hurt to ask.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    The Rays traded their second best pitcher last winter.

    I think that deal worked out okay for them. Just a hunch.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    If the D-backs offered Skaggs, Bradley, and their next 10 best prospects for Adam Wainwright, the Cards laugh them out of the building.

    As for the Rays comparison, that is not remotely even close to a honest comparison and you KNOW IT.

    The Rays did what they did out if financial necessity. They are a small market team that can't afford to pay most if their players. It was a shock to many that Longoria got the contract he did.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    And the Cardinals aren't in a different situation? Are you saying that's an honest comparison based on where the teams are from an organizational standpoiunt?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    But the point still holds: the Rays are substantially better for having made that trade. They got A LOT more value than they gave up. And they are better THIS YEAR for having made the trade.

    And I disagree. I think the Cardinals would jump at that offer for Wainwright. Their pitching staff is still plenty good enough, and that will put them in fat city for a decade.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    I certainly don't think we're in the same situation as the Cardinals.

    But according to you guys, we're knocking on the door of a WS already.

    So I'm just comparing us to real world series contenders to point out that teams that have a real shot at a championship don't offer half their team for trade and don't go through 44+ roster members.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    No, no. Just think they can be competitive next year. I don't think 85 wins is out of the question. Won't do much in that division but it would be a big step forward.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    This is where ignoring my point is biting you. For whatever reason -- you're correct, the specifics of the Rays is that they're financially constrained -- they're forced to trade away most of their good players every year. But Andrew Friedman is incredible at getting value for them. So he'll often wind up a big winner. The Garza trade is something of a push at the moment, but if Lee becomes their starting shortstop for a decade, it's a big win. The Shields trade is ludicrously one-sided.

    The Cubs are not in this position but they are involved in a process of trying to simultaneously win and rebuild a farm system that was dead in the water. Today emphasized just how important good young talent is -- people don't give it up. If someone was willing to wildly overpay on Shark, the secondary goal -- building the minor league system -- had to be addressed. But, since no one was, keep him and push for a winning record in the near future.

    So, the Rays are forced to trade people before they become expensive, the Cubs choose to trade people if they can make a huge increase in young, cost-controlled talent. These are secondary considerations that require the teams to re-adjust, but it doesn't mean they don't plan to compete.

    Another team to consider is the Rangers who, according to sources, had everyone on the team up for trade today. Does that mean they don't plan to compete next year? Or the Brewers who traded Greinke last summer, and then gave up a draft pick to sign Lohse this year.

    Baseball executives often have to worry about multiple things at once and, just because they don't give one of these things the attention you feel it deserves, that doesn't mean it's unimportant to them.

    Finally, you overstated your case on the Cardinals example. Skaggs, Bradley, and their top 10 prospects? That would include our old buddy Randall Delgado -- who could step right into their rotation -- Adam Eaton, the kind of pesky hitter they turn into an MVP, Matt Davidson, and the shortstop they've been looking for, Chris Owings, not to mention another legit power reliever in Jake Barrett. Yes, losing Wainwright would hurt them this year, but the long term benefits are enormous.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    DDJ & Nate have outperformed their contracts. Not trading them doesn't really mean anything nor does it impact the rebuild. Only DDJ is under contract for another year and that at a very reasonable cost. If he is > 1 WAR, it still remains a good deal for the Cubs.

    Most players you sign to actually play baseball, not because they are a trade chip. If they generate sufficient excess value in a trade, great. If they overplay their contract, great. If they under-perform their contract and have a long-term, big $ deal, not great.

    The latter is the only thing that sets back a rebuild.

  • Think the FO played their hand quite well. Teams seemed to clam up at the deadline. Ashame that Gregg turned into a pumpkin in the days heading into the deadline, but overall very happy with the trades/returns.

  • fb_avatar

    I think we did very well this trading season. Gregg and Navarro are the only expiring contracts we didn't trade, and I think Navarro is someone we probably want to re-sign. Gregg I just think didn't have any real value, so unless he had to clear a roster spot, didn't make sense to deal him.

    Getting ahead of the market with Garza and Feldman was smart, IMO, because I think the return was better than what other teams got for their starters. And alot of players on bad teams with expiring contracts (Marlon Byrd, Ervin Santana,Morales, Moore, etc) didn't get moved at all.

    The lack of activity was because we won't give away players

  • As long as these players are traded by the start of next season
    I guest its for the best.

  • A long as these players, and others, are gone by the start of next
    season I guest it for the best.

  • All the Cubs have been vocal about wanting to stay, so this is a good day for them. Kind of cool to see Mrs. Dejesus partying over seeing her hubby stay in town... might as well have some fun with it. DDJ is the first acquisition for Theo and I'm sure there's at least some sense of loyalty between the two.

  • The more I think about its for the best right now. At the Dec. Winter
    meetings some our veterans can be packaged with some our
    prospects, that don't fit our plans, to acquire any missing pieces
    we need.

  • Also, as for teams clinging to their prospects, I can't help but get the impression that it's swung too far in the other direction. Were this team in a spot where they could compete, I wonder how they might handle prospects differently.

    With valuable pieces acquired for what appears to be some very marginal returns, it makes me wonder how aggressive this front office will be in acquiring needs once the team is competitive.

  • In reply to TulaneCubs:

    I think it's swinging towards the overvaluation of prospects and has been going that way for awhile. I think it won't take much to win some bidding wars if a team is willing to give up some value.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Yep, that's certainly the way it seems to me. And the comments that have come out from this front office seem to indicate the same thing, that they're a bit surprised at how teams are clinging to prospects.

  • Our top two "slumpers" have each homered tonight.
    So....Why oh why don't we unload them for Ruth, Gehrig, Koufax and Seaver? What's wrong with our do-nothing Front Office?

  • In reply to StillMissKennyHubbs:

    When those guys hit, it's a different team. Hope to see more of it next year.

Leave a comment