Cubs may trade Jason Hammel early

Last year the Cubs traded Scott Feldman nearly a month before the trade deadline (July 2nd) and picked up two talented, but inconsistent MLB ready players in Jake Arrieta and Pedro Strop.  In doing so, they set the market early before trading their big prize, Matt Garza, in a deal that landed 4 good prospects.

Could they repeat the pattern this year?  ESPN's Buster Olney hears that is exactly what they plan on doing with Jason Hammel as the bait.

Keith Law agrees with the strategy, saying that their is a big need for starting pitching and that Hammel's value is well established.  Between the two, they came up with the following list of teams who could show interest:

  • Orioles
  • Angels
  • Athletics
  • Blue Jays
  • Pirates

The Yankees have also been mentioned in various places.

As for what the Cubs could get for Hammel, I would imagine it could be similar to the return for Feldman or perhaps, if no MLB ready players are available, something along the lines they got for Ryan Dempster.  Peter Gammons calls Hammel an under the radar trade candidate and implies the Cubs can get a return similar to the one the Cubs got for Matt Garza.  I'm sure we'd all take that in a heartbeat.

It's assumed the Cubs would like pitching prospects in return, preferably at the upper level but they would certainly take a Class A pitcher of they can't get a more MLB ready pitcher with some upside.

The trouble is that the Angels and Athletics aren't particularly strong when it comes to pitching prospects and the Orioles aren't going to trade Kevin Gausman or Dylan Bundy or even class A starter Hunter Harvey.  4th  best prospect LHP Eduardo Rodriguez is having an off season in his second go-round in AA, so perhaps he can be made available.

The Blue Jays are deep with prospects and have an MLB ready starter in Sean Nolin, though his upside isn't the same as Jake Arrieta.  Nolin has the ceiling of a #4 starter.  The Jays also have two upside pitchers who are having disastrous years.  Alberto Tirado cannot find the plate and Roberto Osuna is out for the season.  It'd be high risk for upside, but it isn't like the Cubs are giving up more than 3 months of a pitcher in a non-contention year.   Matt Boyd, a safer arm with modest upside, dominated Cubs affiliate Daytona last night.

The Yankees have some interesting arms and I'm sure the Cubs would love to get Dellin Betances or Ian Clarkin but the former is currently a key piece in the Yankees chances and the latter may end up being their best pitching prospect when the end of year rankings come out.  The Cubs have shown interest in Manny Banuelos in the past.  He has been pitching this season after battling through injuries but the Yankees likely aren't ready to give up on him yet.

The precedent has been established with the Feldman trade, can the Cubs front office get creative and pull of another deal for MLB ready talent?  We many have to wait much longer to find out.


Filed under: Rumors/Speculation


Leave a comment
  • I wonder if teams might be interested in Arrieta. I like him. He has some upside and more control. I wonder if teams might overpay to get him as opposed the Hammel rental.

    I'm not sold on Arrieta being a core piece. As I said, I do like him and not talking about dumping him, but he might bring back a better haul in prospects. He is pitching above himself. And the Cubs do have Hendricks in the wings to replace him.

  • In reply to SenatorMendoza:

    I dont think Arrieta's stock is as high as Hammels right now. Nor do I think Hendricks is ready. He might get a cup of joe in Sept.,

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to HoosierDaddy:

    I will be there to hand out the cups.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to SenatorMendoza:

    Why would you trade Arrieta? He's what we're trying to GET.

    Hammels is this year's Feldman, who we traded for Arrieta. Moving him doesn't accomplish anything. We're just spinning our wheels then.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    Exactly on Arrieta.....we control his rights for 3 years after this one, through 2017. No chance we trade him.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:


  • fb_avatar
    In reply to SenatorMendoza:

    This is pure speculation on both of our parts, but I disagree that Arrieta is pitching above himself. If he can harness his control and learn to pitch better (which he has so far this season), Arrieta has ace potential. He could very well flash that ace potential over the course of an entire season with Bosio at the helm of our pitcher training. Arrieta is a high-ceiling/low-floor kind of guy, though. He could be pitching in the minors next season. Hopefully the former materializes and we have a very solid asset on our hands.... all for a rental Feldman.

  • In reply to Joe Stallings:

    I hope your right. I do like Arrieta. But I do think he's more of a #4 who sprinkles great starts, flashing his incredible talent, amongst too many floundering starts. Kind of like a rich-man's Edwin Jackson. Not that there isn't value in that. I just thought if someone is willing to pay for more than that, I wouldn't be against it. And no doubt Bosio has been working his magic. Hopefully he can work more magic with Edwin.

  • In reply to SenatorMendoza:

    They should trade anyone if the trade improves the system, but their trades up til now have been moving short term assets in exchange for long term assets. They have control over Arrieta for 4 or 5 more years, so he certainly doesn't fall under the short term asset category.

    Hammel, on the other hand, if they can or do not extend him, IS that category. I would rather that they extend him if they can do so at a reasonable price. If not, they have little choice but to trade him before the deadline.

  • In reply to SenatorMendoza:


  • In reply to jorel1114:

    please tell me this is a Simpsons reference!

  • In reply to SenatorMendoza:

    Boy, did Arrieta shut me up in a hurry. Awesome game.

  • In reply to SenatorMendoza:

    You need to question him every time he starts.

  • fb_avatar

    Read Olney as well. Believe Samardzija will be the 2nd Cubs' SP traded.

  • fb_avatar

    "Orioles aren't going to trade Kevin Gausman or Dylan Bundy or even class A starter Hunter Harvey"

    Is there any chance Bundy and Harvey would be in play for Samardzija? I saw Gausman pitched 6 IP and allowed 1 ER last night so I could not imagine him being traded for a team for a team in the hunt.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Daniel Rosenberg:

    I would think one of them would have to be included, or Theo will just hang up the phone. He's the key piece for the deadline. David Price is going to cost way more the Jeff S

  • fb_avatar

    If they could some how get Betances and 1-2 lottery ticket arms, I would call it a huge win.

    Send Betances down to Iowa and stretch him out.

    If that doesn't work, they will have their closer for a long time.

    He's been downright filthy as a middle reliever.

    4-0 in 37 innings w 63ks and 10 walks. 1.67 era and .777 whip

  • In reply to Jim Odirakallumkal:

    I can't imagine a team adding Hammel in order to stay in playoff contention would include their best bullpen arm in the deal. The Cubs got Arrieta and Strop because they were pitching terrible and were hurting the Orioles chances. Betances is dominating. No way the Yanks include him in a deal for Hammel.

  • From Toronto I would rather get Daniel Norris but that may be too high a price. Nolin is closer but Norris has more upside.

  • In reply to JeremyR:

    If the Cubs could get Norris from the Jays as the centerpiece of a Hammel deal, that would be a great get in my opinion.

  • I don't think that their is a team out willing to give up what it would take to get Samardzija. I'm good with that.

  • fb_avatar

    I hope we trade early and often.

    Bonifacio, Valbuena, Scierholtz, Villanueva, Russell may all have some value for teams. Barney, Strop, and Lake probably have no value, but if any team is interested, then by all means.

    And if we can find some teams to take on reclamation projects like, BJax and Vitters, I think they've worn out their appeal to Chicago.

    While I agree that Bryant or Baez won't be up by opening day, I think we need to start clearing up the roster, and start finding some pitching while we do it.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    I believe trading Valbueno would be a terrible mistake

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to William Ray:

    You really think he's going to be starting in two years?

    I think trading now would almost certainly be selling high on him. He's not getting any better and has very little upside.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    How can you say Valbuena is not getting better?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to wastrel:

    How can you say he will keep getting better? How can you say that he can sustain this?

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    If you answer my question, I'll answer yours. You said he's not getting any better. Have you been watching the team this year?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to wastrel:

    His BABIP is .372 this year.

    His CAREER BABIP is .271

    He's been lucky. EXTREMELY lucky.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    His OBP has always been good. Second only to Rizzo now, correct? He sees lots of pitches, he doesn't make stupid mistakes on the bases, he's solid defensively, 28 years old and if all the prospects work out, he's your perfect utility infielder. I've appreciated his game for a couple years. There was a game where he hit a late inning homer to tie, and Marmol, who had been struggling, got out of a couple innings unscored on. Camera showed both guys in the dugout, Marmol was happy about his outing and grinning, Valbuena was soberly focused on the team winning the game, not concerned about his own glory. He's the kind of player World Series winners have a couple of, and they're not so easy to find. Of course you could trade any player. But it's better to trade an overrated commodity than a gem like Valbuena.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    Valbuena won't have nearly as much value to other teams as he does to the Cubs. He has the exact, perfect approach our FO guys like their players to have. He will be a great mentor for the young guys coming up. Rizzo is the only other guys even in the same conversation as Valbuena in that regard. We need to have some vets for leadership on the team. Rizzo will be by the time the prospects start trickling in, Castro will in terms of years be a veteran but I don't really want the young guys taking after him too much. It would be kind of an unfair burden to put all that pressure on a 24 year old guy in his second season, just starting to come around consistently after a tough first full season. Let him focus on him for a little while yet.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    I love BABIP. I've been accused of being BABIP police because I think it tells you so much.

    But BABIP is only part of the story. And by only citing BABIP, you're missing an incredibly important part of the story: Valbuena's batted ball rates.

    I'm not crazy enough to think that a guy with a .272 career BABIP whose single-season career high is .296 (not counting the 54 PAs in 2008) will magically jump into the high-.300s where almost nobody lives.

    But I also take notice when a guy replaces 20% of his groundballs with line drives. Valbuena's LD% last year was just 15.6%; this year, he's at 26.2%. That's 15th in baseball among guys with at least 150 PAs. That's Freddie Freeman/Jayson Werth/Robinson Cano territory.

    To be clear, I don't think Valbuena can maintain this level mainly because only the truly elite can. But in all of my projections, Valbuena sticks on our roster for the next couple of years as a reserve infielder and useful lefty bench bat. He may want a starting job and there are plenty of teams for whom he has more value (the Yankees).

    You can't just write off his BABIP success as being lucky. Hitting lots of seeing-eye singles is lucky; hitting a boatload of line drives is just good hitting.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    Doubt they'd get much for him. Didn't get anything for a similar OBP/leader/defense type in DeJesus. Didn't get anything but a finesse A ball pitcher for Jeff Baker (Carreno, who is still hurt) and projected as a #5 or middle reliever even when healthy. I'd rather not repeat that type of deal. Better to keep him then get little to nothing in return.

    I never understand why teams trade players for the sake of trading them. If they do trade Valbuena somebody will get a gift and the Cubs likely won't get so much as a thankyou.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:


  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    well, if they don't get a decent offer for him, then no crap.

    But I never said "trade Valbuena for a bucket of balls."

    So, if you're going to reframe an argument to suit you, go nuts.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    Did I say he would be starting? Does he only have value to the team if he is starting?? No and no would be the correct answers to those questions

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    Did i sayhe would still be starting in two years? Does he only have value to the team if he is starting?? The answer to both questions is no in case you were wondering

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Giffmo:

    Catch 22 here: Valbuena is controlled for 2 1/2 more years. The only way the Cubs would trade him right now is if they're convinced this performance is a flash in the pan and he reverts to bench player mode over a full season.

    However, everyone else knows that, so if the Cubs shop him, they'll be getting offers assuming he reverts to bench player mode after they acquire him.

    There's really no way to get reasonable value for Valbuena -- he's worth as much to us as he is anyone else.

  • In reply to William Ray:

    I agree with that unless we get more in value for him in return. Valbuena is a great super-sub with good plate discipline and a little pop. Yea I know everyone loves his bat-flip me included but for the right return I can see him traded.

  • In reply to Bilbo161:

    I like the Cubs chances if Valbuena is our weak link.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    I think Valbuena is being a bit undervalued in this conversation by both sides. He is hitting .290, but his OBP is .394, which is above average (.400 is considered elite). His slugging percentage (.456) is also no slouch. His weighted on base average, considered a good summary of overall offensive production is good for 28th in all of baseball, just ahead of Freddie Freeman and just behind Joey Votto. He's also walking (15%) almost as much as he's striking out (20%).

    Is he going to keep that up for good? His career numbers say no, but up to this point he's been way more productive than we give him credit for. He's also been steadily improving every season, which shows that he's making adjustments to get ahead of the curve, not just having a fluke year. Not to mention playing solid defense at two positions and being the definition of the type of player this FO loves. A guy putting up the type of numbers he's putting up this year is no super-sub, it's a major league caliber everyday player. The only question is if this is an outlier or if it's the player he's going to be going forward.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    Strop has no value? You must have been watching a different Strop than I have.

    And I see no reason whatsoever to trade Valbuena, again with the caveat that anyone should be traded if the offer is enough. He is turning into an outstanding supersub, with the potential of turning into a core player as a better than average starter at second base.

  • In reply to DaveP:

    With the Cubs bullpen of youngsters and with more arms on the way I could see a couple moves from there but I don't think Strop is one of them unless its included in another deal

  • a GM will overpay and Theo will have that GM convinced the Cubs sold low .

  • fb_avatar

    I have been saying lately that I think any Hammel trade will be viewed through the Jake Peavy prism. That should be as low of an offer as we go. That would be a 3-5 prospect that is almost ready and 2 top 20 guys that are high ceiling but a long way away. I do not know if that is going to happen but if it were me then I would set that as the bar.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Richard Hood:

    I think Peavy had alot more value. First, he was traded with 1 1/2 years of control, not 1/2 season. Second, he has a much longer track record of success than Hammel. It's not really close.

    Hammel's value is much closer to Feldman's last year

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Zonk:

    Actually in the short term Peavy did not have more of a track record because of injury. You had no idea if his body would hold up for a season so any idea that his year on his contract is not valid. He had one season with over 200 innings in the last 5 and his numbers had been pretty bad over that injury stretch. Now in 2012 he was alright and got 200 innings but that is not same as saying they had this huge long term track records of results.

  • In reply to Richard Hood:

    Peavy proved his health by pitching 219 innings and making an all-star team the previous season. Two things Hammel has not done. He held up fine. If 219 innings doesn't convince you I don't know what will.

    Couple that with an extra year of control and the Cubs aren't getting the Peavy package. Look for a Feldman package. Reclamation projects.

  • In reply to Richard Hood:

    Peavy has a Cy Young to his name.

  • Wonder if there's a way the Cubs could get Nick Kingham or Josh Bell from the Pirates for Hammel. Kingham was in a lot of top 100s and Bell was on the fringes of some. Kingham is about ready to be promoted to AAA and could be in the big leagues next year.

  • In reply to TulaneCubs:

    I don't think the Pirates are going to give up key pieces to get a rental. They need to be too cost conscious. I think they will try to acquire players with more than one year of team control if they are going to move their better prospects.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to mjvz:

    I agree. The Pirates have done it right so far and shown every indication that they're willling to play the long game.

    They might move young Ofs since they are pretty loaded but their pitching isn't going anywhere.

  • In reply to mjvz:

    While I generally agree, Josh Bell doesn't really have a position for them in an OF of Marte, McCutchen & Polanco. Granted, he's still probably a couple of years away, but they're going to have to deal him eventually.

    I don't think they want to give up any of their better prospects at all, but the whole "more than 1 year of team control" thing is a catch 22. I think the Pirates don't want to deal from their bevy of prospect talent, but in order to get a guy they control for more than 1 year, they're going to have to give up more to do so. I could see them compromising by giving up a guy that's blocked like Bell in order to get a rental.

  • In reply to TulaneCubs:

    I love the Pittsburgh system but agree that its not their style to trade their best prospects. We are better off waiting and trying to get some of their young veterans as they become too expensive for the Pirates. How much control do they have left on their CFer?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Bilbo161:

    Yeah, we'll see. There was a chasm between the Pirates and Cubs over the offseason on valuation of Samardzija. Possible they can do it with Hammel since both sides agree three months of Hammel is worth less than 2 years of Jeff.

  • In reply to Bilbo161:

    McCutcheon just signed an extension last year. I beleive hes there until 2020.

  • I suppose any team with TOR pitcher(s) close to pitching in the show prefer Hamel, because they might be able to keep the them.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to 44slug:

    Hammels is a rental. Shark has a year of control left after 2014 AND has far superior stuff. It's not even close.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    I was trying to say Hammel wouldn't cost a team their best pitchers.

  • fb_avatar

    I'll just say for the record that Gammons is a little off of his rocker if he expects the same quality/quantity of trade for Hammel as we did for Garza. This appears to be a more saturated market than last season (more of a buyer's market) and Hammel's talent level is clearly a notch below Garza's, although his performance this season has been every bit as good as Garza's was last season. I would be shocked and elated if he is correct, but I don't expect it.

  • Kingham would be an awesome second player in a Samardzija deal.

  • fb_avatar

    Gonna be a funny season for trades. If you look at the standings, a LOT of teams have a chance. But if guys look at their teams, there aren't many that are just Jason Hammel away from making a serious run.

  • If the Cubs do this and also trade Jeff, what are they going to put on the ML mound? They can't send out Travis Wood as their #1, #2, #3, and #4 starter, can they?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to jack:

    Good question. We have Wood, Arrieta, E-Jax. Reasonable options include Hendricks, Rusin, and maybe Tsuyoshi Wada.

    Remember our rotation at the end of 2012? It went:


    Whatever we do, it' won't be worse than that.......

  • In reply to Zonk:

    That rotation was UGLY at the end of 2012 - especially since even Wood was not the same Wood we saw most of last season.

  • In reply to Zonk:

    I just shuddered looking at that 2012 rotation. Please no!

    My question would be if the Cubs kept their current rotation next year. And replaced Olt, Barney, Scheirholtz with players that can actually hit. How competitive would the team be? I've been on board with the rebuild, but I cannot abide another Rusin, Raley, Berken, Germano horror show.

  • In reply to jack:

    Think Carlos Villanueava getting bumped back into a staring role (a role he likes, but doesn't seem suited for IMO), and following up with the likes of Rusin or Wada or possiblly (less probably) Hendricks or Beeler (if he's healthy enough to go).

    It would likely be a step down from Shark & Hammel,.... but they are not terrible pitching choices like the 3-4 headed waiver-wire monster filling the #4/#5 spots in the rotation at the end of 2012.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to drkazmd65:

    I am of the opinion that Villaneuava will not be here either. There is just too much value in a guy that swing to the rotation in a moment or go 3 innings in the pen and not get you killed.

  • fb_avatar

    I like Gammons, but Garza is not a reasonable comp for a Hammel return. Garza had a much better track record, and better stuff. Let's also not forget that the Rangers GM is on record as regretting that trade as an overpay. No chance we repeat that.

    I think a Feldman-esque return, perhaps a little more, is realistic.

  • I think this would be a good time to have anyone who said hammel was a bad sign to please stand up. There was a lot of you that said they didn't like that singing. So how you feelin now?

  • In reply to INgold91:

    I wasn't convinced that signing Hammel was a good idea,.... was wanting the management to see what the likes of Hendricks, Beeler, or Wada could do.

    I have already (a month or so ago) publically stated that I was wrong on that call - so - already at that portion of Crow.

  • Somehow if the cubs could acquire some good outfield talent along with some pitching when the deadline passes that would be clutch. Joc peterson would fit the organization a lot as he is a LH hitter and has tremendous upside. cubs outfield has been trash offensively. samardzija to the dodgers? even if cubs cant get great SP with dodgers u cant pass up peterson.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Chicago Cubs Fan 24:

    Of all the OF the Dodgers have, Pederson is the only one that can play a decent CF. For that reason, I think they should keep him, but I have no idea how they are going to clear off 1 or 2 of those albatross contracts. They should try to dump Crawford and Ethier, but good luck finding takers, even with the Dodgers eating millions.

    I don't see the Dodgers trading him, but I could be wrong

  • In reply to Zonk:

    Pederson/Urias is something I've been thinking of for a couple months now. Doub't it can happen but hey, dreams are fun. I wonder if they bite if we take one of those contracts too.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Bilbo161:

    As much as we need pitching, I am ALL IN on Joc Pederson.

    I'd love to see Joc in CF and Schwarber in LF in a couple years. We could use the lefties.

    (not giving up on Almora but Joc is ready now and if Almora forces the issue it's a very good problem to have)

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    Agreed on Joc Pederson. There ya go!

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    A few days ago, the Dodgers said that Pederson wouldn't be promoted "for a while" because they feel that he’s not a finished product yet and still has some maturity issues....

    “Pederson, in the view of club officials, still is not a finished product. He is striking out once every 3.5 plate appearances and remains a work in progress against left-handed pitching. The team also wants to see him mature. Pederson, 22, has failed to run out groundballs on multiple occasions.”

    Maybe the Cubs have more of a chance at Pederson than we think? I agree the Cubs need pitching, but if the Cubs can get a near-mlb ready talent like Pederson to play CF and set the table for our power bats, it would be a coup. I'd at least want the Dodgers to throw in Anderson in a deal for Shark, as Lee is a back of rotation starter with no out pitch.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ghost Dawg:

    Zach Lee. That guy is becoming a very useful draftee. When people assume projection for elite high school pitchers, you can just slam down the Zach Lee trump card.

  • I think they should re-sign Hammel and trade Samardzija and Villaneuva. Last year I thought they should have re-signed Dioner Navarro, even if they had to pay him starter money, say Veras' 4 mil for a start, and given him more playing time. The team was better last year when he was behind the plate and he could win a game for you off the bench. He certainly would have helped this team more than Ruggiano and Veras have. If you want some veterans, keep some veterans.

  • In reply to wastrel:

    Navarro is at .262/.308/.335 this year; he's replacement-level incarnate. I'm glad we didn't sign him and Ruggiano profiles as a better fit for the roster this year and next.

    Veras was a disaster, although I still find it peculiar that we bailed on him when we did. After he came back from his "injury," he was very good (over six outings: 7.2 IP, 6 H, 1 BB, 0 HR, 8 SO). It's hard to believe that we couldn't have gotten something of value for him if he continued pitching even decently, even if it was just a flyer.

  • Garza did get us 4 prospects but all had some sort of flaw. Don't see why we can't expect the same from Hammel. Garza lets his emotions get out of control sometimes and can't field his position too well. Hammel seems to field bunts much better and is having a fantastic year without as much fear of injury.

  • I like the idea of actually trying to COMPETE in 2015, so
    1) Keep Shark and resign Hammels
    2) Plan on Bryant and Alcantara starting at 3B and 2B next April
    3) Sign FA Nelson Cruz to a 2-3 year contract to play RF and bat 4th
    4) Keep position players Bonifacio, Valbeuena, Lake, Castro, Rizzo, and Beef. Also keep Sweeney IF he shows he can stay healthy and has a pulse. All other current position players need not reapply, although Mike Olt could work on his game at Iowa.

  • i do hope we trade Hammels early..

  • Could you trade Hammel very soon and then move Villaneuva to rotation and then trade him at deadline

  • Teams that will be trading for Hammel are purchasing the 2nd half of this season. That is all. If the teams scouts think that Hammel is for real and will keep doing this the 2nd half of the year, then the team will pay accordingly. Whether he repeats this next year or beyond is a NON-factor with regards to the trade price. So the question then becomes, are Hammel's statistics based on luck or is their quality behind those numbers?

    Jason Hammel - 6'6", 225lbs - he has been a horse with 83 IP in 13 starts = 6.4 IP per start

    2.81 ERA - 3.02 FIP = 0.21
    1.9 Walks/per 9 8.2 K's/per 9 = 4.22 K/BB Ratio
    Walks/Hits per IP (WHIP) = 0.984 (#7 MLB/#5 NL)
    Hits per 9 IP = 6.912 (#5 MLB)
    ERA+ = 137 (#8 NL)
    bWAR = 2.5 (#5 NL)

    Hammel's numbers show that statistically he has been one of the top starting pitchers in baseball this season. His numbers also seem to indicate that he has had success as a result of quality pitching and not a result of smoke and mirrors. I reiterate that teams trading for Hammel are buying only the 2nd half, and if they think he can keep up these numbers for the rest of the year, than he could be a difference maker for a contending team, . If the Cubs can get a deal approaching the Garza trade value then I would be ecstatic....and if he does keep it up the rest of the year, I'd be all for making him an offer after the season to return to the Cubs on a 2-3 year deal. As I have said before, trading him before the deadline and signing him this off-season, are not mutually exclusive.

  • In reply to Ghost Dawg:

    I wouldn't be surprised to see Hammel moved early and maybe a July 2 deal with cubs throwing in some IFA pool $ they cant spend. I could also see Cubs moving a prospect or 2 in a sweetened deal for a higher closer to majors arm

  • Good news, a couple more signings...

    Chesny Young, 2B and 14th round draft pick will sign. Yag's website is still down but I pulled the links from the page source....

    From a radio interview today: Young says that he is at the Cape Cod League right now, waiting to take a drug test for the Cubs, hen he will take the physical, sign the contract, and then fly out to Arizona in the next couple of days. Describing his own game he said that his best asset is his pure hitting ability. He says he will hit the weight room now to improve his power.

  • In reply to Ghost Dawg:

    The second signing today is 18th round draft pick, prep pitcher, Austyn Willis - 6'6", 205lbs. He was suppose to be one of the toughest signings in the top 20, so I'm really glad they got it done. He's a big kid with some upside. Here is the article from today's Daily Press...

    Barstow pitcher Austyn Willis plans to sign with the Chicago Cubs pending a drug test and physical.

    Willis was selected in the 18th round as the 529th pick overall of the MLB First-Year Player Draft on June 7. He has already informed UC Santa Barbara, which he signed a letter of intent with on Nov. 2013, that he intends to sign with the Cubs. He’s is scheduled to take a drug test Friday and then head to the Cubs spring training facility next week in Mesa, Ariz., for a physical. If all goes well, he expects to sign his first pro contract.
    Willis didn’t hire an agent and handled the negotiation with his family. “That was crazy, weird,” Willis said. “I don’t know the word for it. It was exciting. Something I’ve never experienced before, negotiating my life for the next couple years. “I’m still living the dream, so I’m perfectly fine with whatever.”

  • saw this on twitter @STATS_MLB

    #Cubs 3B Luis Valbuena is batting NL-best .390 w/13 xtra-base hits over 23 game stretch sing May 13

    ummm WOW

  • Everyone seems to think that the Cubs MUST trade Hammel (or whoever) for pitching. But I don't think that this front office is that predictable. They have shown an uncanny ability to sign middle-of-the-pack free agent pitchers that quickly emerge from that middle. I wouldn't be surprised if they traded Hammel for a Pederson-like position player (insert your favorate name here) and worried about pitching this off season.

  • In reply to DaveP:

    The reason for that is how close some of the positional players are to come to Chicago. also when you hear waves and waves of pitching that's why you see that. I think if they could get catching prospect or a OF they would consider it strongly depeding on what they plan on doing with Bryant, Baez and Olt

  • Why the F*&^*& is coughlin leading off and not Valbuena or really anyone else?

  • In reply to nmu’catsbball:

    his 23 xtra base hits might be better further down the lineup.. talking about Valbuena.

  • In reply to CubfanInUT:

    Fair enough, but someone needs to be on for those to drive anyone in. And as I say that he leads off with a base hit and Valbuena can't drive him in.. haha

  • John I'll trade you Tywin for Tyrion straight up right now.

  • Let's not trade Arrieta. He looks like he could be the Ace of the team. :)

  • What would be ideal would be to sit down with Hammel and show him a plan to get something good for him with the promise they'll do what it takes to resign him. I say that because he has given every indication he wants to be on this team. Would he agree to that idea to further improve the team he wants to be part of? I know it's a rare occurrence, but if he truly does see himself as part of something really big happening here, he might just go for it.

  • Anyone know if Wittenmyer has any sources? He wrote this today: "one major-league source said he expects Hammel to end up in Seattle."

    I'd love to see that happen. Seattle has some decent pitching prospects and Jack Zduriencik (?) is an old-school GM who doesn't rely much on advanced data so he feels like a great guy to deal with! :)

    The other thing I think we need to root for is that the Royals continue their current hot streak. I'd love to ensure Shields isn't on the trade market, too.

  • In reply to Deacon:

    Possible the FO is trying to heat the market up by implying the market is heating up.

  • In reply to Deacon:

    Jack Z is new school -- in fact, he was hailed as the next genius by the saber-crowd a few years back. They do have good pitching prospects, however.

    Another plus is that he is on the hot seat, so may make a desperate move.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Did you forget about this John?

    One of those speaking out is Blengino, the former No. 2 in Zduriencik’s front office. Blengino, who was working for the Milwaukee Brewers with Zduriencik at the time, said he authored virtually the entire job application package Zduriencik gave the Mariners in 2008, depicting a dual-threat candidate melding traditional scouting with advanced statistical analysis.

    Blengino said he prepared the package because he was versed in the hot trend of using advanced stats for team decisions.

    “Jack portrayed himself as a scouting/stats hybrid because that’s what he needed to get the job,” Blengino said. “But Jack never has understood one iota about statistical analysis. To this day, he evaluates hitters by homers, RBI and batting average and pitchers by wins and ERA. Statistical analysis was foreign to him. But he knew he needed it to get in the door.”

  • In reply to Ghost Dawg:

    If he didn't know it then someone in the org did because many of his moves, especially early moves, were saber-friendly and lauded by the community at the time.

  • espn has a story today that trade discussions for Shark and Hammel have already begun with Seattle, Atlanta , and I think Tor if memory serves. Theo jumping the market again, dude is a FO God.

Leave a comment