Is Cole Hamels Cubs Version of Jayson Werth?

Is Cole Hamels Cubs Version of Jayson Werth?

So the Cubs apparently put in a claim for Cole Hamels. What does this mean? Could Hamels be the Cubs version of Jayson Werth?

There is still not a ton of information out there. However, we do know a little bit right now.

The Cubs put in the claim on Hamels with the intent of acquiring him. There does not seem to be another motive, such as blocking another team within their division from landing him.

We have all suspected the Cubs would make a move for a top-of-the-rotation arm at some point soon, most likely in the off-season. Much of that speculation has been focused on acquiring a free agent ace such as Jon Lester.

The downside of making a deal with Philadelphia for Hamels is that they would likely require a steep cost in return, including, but not limited to, Addison Russell, the very talented shortstop the Cubs just acquired for Jeff Samardzija.

On the flipside, you get Hamels at roughly a 5 years, $100 million price tag. That seems to be fairly reasonable compared to what the Cubs would pay for an ace on the open market. If you are worried about committing that type of dough for a 30-year-old pitcher, just know that is the price of top arms. Also, keep in mind that lefties last longer.

Will the Cubs turn around and deal Russell for Hamels only a month after acquiring the SS? That is not likely. I think it would take a package of Cubs prospects outside of the top five and a desire from Philadelphia's standpoint to get out from under the big contract for this to work. I can't see Phillies GM Ruben Amaro giving up his best trading chip without restocking his barren system.

At the end of the day, this is another positive signal the Cubs are open for big-market business once again.

Many parallels have been drawn between the Cubs and the Washington Nationals when it comes to the blueprint of tanking consecutive MLB seasons in order to get high draft picks to build a young juggernaut.

When it came time for the Nationals to make a bit of a move, they overpaid and landed Werth off the free-agent market. It was a move that raised many eyebrows at the time. Yet, at the end of the day, the Cubs will likely have to make a similar type of move sooner or later.

Could this be a case of sooner?


Thanks for reading; if you enjoyed it, please share with others.  And if you'd like to be updated on my future posts, and those from the rest of the Cubs Insider team, you can subscribe below.

Type your email address in the box and click the "create subscription" button. My list is completely spam free, and you can opt out at any time.

And be sure to like Cubs Insider on Facebook. You can also submit to reddit

Filed under: Uncategorized


Leave a comment
  • unfortunately, the Cubs are not one of the 9 teams ke gave his okay..but maybe he would change his mind for "A Few Dollars More"

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to chibob:

    Jayson Stark ‏@jaysonst 3m

    More fodder for the Hamels-to-Cubs rumors: Sources say Cubs ARE on his approved trade list. Turns out Red Sox are NOT on that list

  • Not the first person to say this, but I'd definitely build a package around Almora. Maybe Almora, a surpluss bat like Vogelbach (or McKinney), and then a pitching prospect (Tseng, Johnson, Edwards). Thats a pretty nice package of players for a team that is rebuilding.

  • Almora & Edwin Jackson for Hamels.........take it or leave it Philadelphia.................btw, Jason Strark is saying Hamels has okay a deal to Chicago.

  • In reply to CubsTalk:

    Btw, nobody is ever gonna accept Edwin Jackson in a trade. You're gonna need Almora plus another top prospect to get Hamels.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mattrix91079:

    If Philly is really trying to dump salary, which seems odd but what do I know, their asking price may be a sliding scale

  • In reply to Evan Altman:

    If you were the Phila. general manager, and engaged in a salary dump, would you accept a player with no potential to help a struggling team for about another $23 million? This isn't like the NBA where one picks up bad contracts (salary cap wise) just to dump the player.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to jack:

    You're saying Almora has no potential? I was not saying that Edwin Jackson was a possibility but that the Cubs might be able to give up less by taking on more of the contract.

  • In reply to Evan Altman:

    Jackson was the antecedent to no potential, who still has $23 million due on his contract.

  • In reply to Mattrix91079:

    Almora straight up for other prospects....and the Phillies should be happy with that deal!.....Cubs are in the drivers seat....not the Phillies.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to CubsTalk:

    Sorry the Phillies are in the drivers seat. The only reason Hamels is being offered is to get some young talent that have all star potential. We don't need to dump salary like the writer suggests. Why get rid of a great young pitcher with so much talent? It's stupid. You have to give up the farm to get Hamels. If not we keep him and try to get our hitting another way. If only we could get rid of Howard's contract.

  • In reply to CubsTalk:

    take it or leave it? do you not understand how this works? philly will laugh at your offer and pull him right back. they don't have to trade him and as far as i can't tell don't want to trade him. something absolutely unfair to the cubs is what it would take for them to say ok. think rizzo and russell as a start.

  • fb_avatar

    Addison Russell is way too much to pay for the right/obligation to pay a 30 year old pitcher $100M. Why not just wait until free agency for Scherzer, Lester, Sheilds, or Masterson?

  • I agree. If the Phillies couldn't get an A-rated prospect for Hammels and that contract before the non-waiver trade deadline, then why would he be worth one after. (As a pitcher he is worth far more than an A-rated prospect, but that contract is a huge commitment as a strikeout pitcher enters his prime injury 30s.) But I would give up a quantity package of prospects for Hammels, maybe as rich as Vizcaino, Vogelbach and Corey Black. None are Top 10 prospects.

    For those who think this is too much "potential" to give up for a proven all-star lefty, also consider that such an acquisition would give tons of extra credibility this off-season as the Cubs go after either Lester or Scherzer. Like Takada last off-season, neither will have much patience for a rebuild taking a couple more years. They want to compete pretty immediately, and that means addign more quality veterans to the strong young core.

  • fb_avatar

    No way would I lay TOR money on Masterson or Shields and certainly not Russell, or Soler, or Bryant, for Hamels,but I'd eat the whole balance due on his contract and toss in McKinney,Vogelbach and Pierce Johnson. A take it or leave it offer. I can't see the Yankees topping that deal or the Red Sox either. I would try to sign Shields as a # 2 starter. It's your money Ricketts so use it when you need it,I'm picturing a bus load of opera singers belting out the "It's your money jingo" use it when you need coming from the bus driver.

  • Notwithstanding the hot stove leaguers here, besides the partial no trade clause, Arguello points out that anyone the Cubs trade back would appear to have to clear waivers (to Philly's level). Arguello was talking about players like Vogelbach, but his being mired in A doesn't seem like he is the type of prospect the Phillies want.

    It was also mentioned on the radio that if Philadelphia wasn't picky about the return they expected, they would have traded before the deadline.

  • fb_avatar

    Looks like it's a moot point now anyway. But Cubs are proving that they are willing to spend on someone.

  • In reply to Evan Altman:

    Only proved if Philadelphia pulls another Alex Rios. Does a claimant have a right to pull back a claim?

  • In reply to jack:

    I don't believe so...once you claim, you can't take back. Otherwise you would have seen rios and was it meyers from a few years ago thrown back possibly when the "block claim" was made. They didn't really want those players, but got stuck with them when they made the claim.

Leave a comment