Quantcast

Jeff Samardzija has been killing it since joining the rotation to start this season. He’s had a bad start (and a half), but in all other outings, he hasn’t just been good, he’s been absurdly good. He’s got a 2.62 FIP (17th best in baseball), has already accumulated 1.2 WAR (9th best), and is striking out more than a batter an inning (14th best). He’s throwing four quality pitches with superior command, and he’s been remarkably efficient for a guy striking out so many batters.

And, as you might expect, baseball is taking notice. Some praise after last night’s dominance of the Braves:

  • “He’s really, really good,” said Chipper Jones. “Obviously, I’ve only faced him out of the bullpen [before today], but he’s got staying power. Good heater. Has two heaters, a two-seamer and four-seamer. Cuts it sometimes. I didn’t really see any sliders but I saw a couple of splits. Command has always been kind of shaky for him, and it looks like he’s got the command thing down, or at least he did tonight. He was real tough.” (AJC)
  • “That was my first time facing him, I believe,” said Jason Heyward. “He looked great. He’s got some good pitches. Fastball – four-seam and two-seam. Splitter was awesome. Slider was pretty good, too.” (Tribune)
  • “We’d seen the video of him, it’s 94-95 [mph] with movement,” said Braves manager Freddi Gonzalez. “And then today he had the secondary pitches that he threw for strikes, had a lot of swings and misses.’’ (Tribune)
  • “Scout’s comp on Samardzija: Healthy Josh Johnson, downhill 98 MPH, great tilt to slider, filthy split, 91 MPH cutter.” (Peter Gammons)

A healthy Josh Johnson might have become the best pitcher in baseball over the last five years, so I’d say that’s a mighty nice compliment. Probably a bit over the top, even, but, hey – Samardzija’ll take it.

If the Shark Attack keeps pitching like he has so far this year, he’s going to get more and more praise like that – and I’m going to feel completely comfortable dodging your arrows when I keep saying “Shark Attack.”

  • Njriv

    Imagine a rotation of Hamels, Garza, Shark, (If they keep Dempster and he pitches like he is this year) and maybe and a Travis Wood that can live up to his potential. Scary.

    • hansman1982

      Ya, I will say, thus far, Bosio is performing MUCH better than the Moustache did last year. Not only did we have injuries but noone was performing worth a damn.

      MMM, maybe Theo, Jed and Jason do know a thing or two about baseball…

      • MaxM1908

        I’m glad you mentioned Bosio. I was thinking while walking to work today (yes, I spend my morning walks thinking about the Cubs), how much of this rotation’s unexpected success is attributable to Bosio? I think Shark’s performance is largely related to his offseason work, but could Bosio have given him some “click” type pointers? Garza is naturally gifted, but even he is pitching above his typical self. What about Dempster? Has Bosio helped him regain some consistency to his pitching? And Maholm, not great stuff, but pitching well enough to win games. If you had to guess, what percent of the Cubs’ SP success is attributable to Bosio and the role he plays?

        • hansman1982

          I have no clue what percentage but the past 2 seasons have taught me that a pitching coach is worth his weight in silver…

          If I did have to put a percentage – I would say about 25% or about the same I assign to the Manager for the success/failure of the team.

          • Cedlandrum

            Well considering Samarzija worked with Riggins in the minors and last year he really set himself up for his breakout year, it is hard to give Bosio too much credit for some of the stuff happening.

            Also Garza turned himself into a better pitcher starting last year. So I don’t know that you can pin too much credit or blame anywhere.

        • rcleven

          You don’t need great stuff to be a good MLB pitcher. What you do need is (much like real estate) is location, location and location. Changing speed is helpful in keeping hitters off balance and zeroing in on location.

          • dob2812

            Yeah but stuff helps. Like a lot. There’s a strong correlation between velocity and the ability to generate swinging strikes. Stuff is more than velocity, sure, but throwing 95 on a consistent basis is a great start if you’re looking for a good pitcher.

    • cubs1967

      Next year should be garza-shark-hamels-sign anibal sanchez-t wood; that would be the best in the division with the brewers likely to lose greinke and carpenter at age 38 no longer going to be the force he was for the cards; even if the cubs don’t spend on offense next year letting bjax-rizzo-cardenas-lahair-w castillo-castro lead the team; don’t need to score too many runs with that top 4 plus t wood. (and 45M plus comes off the payroll this year so there is monies to spend).

      • North Side Irish

        I think that if Hamels leaves Philly, it will be for the Dodgers. He’s a west coast guy who has hinted at playing closer to home. Besides, I’m not sure the Cubs will be ready to pull the trigger on a huge money deal by next season.

        But I love the Anibal Sanchez idea…really good pitcher who won’t need the monster contract but would be a really solid addition to the middle of the rotation. He’ll be 29 by the start of next season, so he may be a little older than the team would like, but he was also a Red Sox farmhand, so they front office guys are familiar with him.

        • Joe

          Does anybody see the Cubs putting down big money for two starting pitchers next year? Can’t say I do…

  • https://www.facebook.com/chris.siuty Chris84

    It was either the beginning of last season, or the beginning of the 2010 season. My wife and I were driving somewhere and we had been listening to the Cubs game. The Cubs blew it and during Kap’s post game, some woman from Shark’s home town called in and said “I’ve been watching Jeff play ball since he was ten years old. Why aren’t the Cubs giving him a chance?”

    I think I said something like “because he’s bad at baseball.”

    Last night, while watching the game, my wife asked “isn’t this the guy you said was bad at baseball?”

    My response? “I have no idea what you’re talking about.”

    • hansman1982

      and he may still prove that he is bad at baseball, or it could be the cliche of “when he applies himself, he succeeds”.

      I will say this, I am the happiest about a Cubs team on May 8th as I have been since 2009. Their future is so bright, the aliens on Pluto have to wear shades…

      • https://www.facebook.com/chris.siuty Chris84

        Agreed 100% across the board.

  • Dan

    I don’t expect the Cubs to make the playoffs and I actually don’t expect them to be above .500. I’m hoping this Cubs team can surprise me and get above .500.

  • Cubs Dude

    Not to get ahead of ourselves, but if Shark and Lahair continue to be a studs I think the rebuilding process will be moved along much faster than most of us thought. Hell, we may be able to seriously compete next year for the playoffs with an added bat and Hamels.

    • JB88

      Agree 100%. And I’m fairly certain that a lot of Cubs’ bloggers have been raising this point that the first time Epstein did this he got lucky on a few players. If Shark and LaHair blossom, then luck is going to factor into this again.

      I’ll also say this, Ian Stewart is really starting to look good. That K in the 7th blew, but those first 2 strikes called were terrible calls by the ump IMO. Stewart has been raking line drives left and right and his HRs this year have been Ernie Bank type homers, except it’s been the second baseman who’s been bending his knees to jump at the liner …

      • King Jeff

        I don’t think it’s luck at all. The old regime decided that they had Shark and LaHair figured out and weren’t willing to give them any other opportunities. Epstein, Hoyer, and Svuem decided that they were good enough to get a chance and they have run with it. It’s more an indictment of the way the Cubs used to do things than it is a lucky strike by the new guys.

        • Ivy Walls

          This is why you change leadership be it baseball or business or organizations. Samardzija was pigeon holed he got a shot because the Ep-Hoy team had no intellectual or emotional capital invested, same for LaHair. The same is on the other hand where there is love of the past as in misguided loyalty.

          I am member of a volunteer not for profit organization where its leaders have made the wrong decision since 2008, finally enough people were fed up and said either we change leadership (including the feeder groups) or we leave. Their first response was no one else would step up but of course they were only asking their insiders (circular favoratism) when finally en masse they resigned and we got fresh blood.

          It was never intentions or work it was judgment. Now things are going again, we rid ourselves of dead wood, of decision processes that led to poor outcomes and the old guard said we never would have done that….of course I replied you made poor decisions.

  • Jay Anderson Jr

    Between LaHair and Shark, I don’t know who I enjoy watching the most. I will say this Cubs team is really enjoyable to watch. Even when we lost those early games, we still played hard through the entire game. Look like this crew, Theo and Company, know what they are doing.

    • https://www.facebook.com/chris.siuty Chris84

      I was saying that during Spring Training. This team isn’t going to win a lot of games, but they’ll be fun to watch, much like a lot of the mid 80′s Cubs teams.

  • calicubsfan007

    I’m glad the Shark experiment is working out. Bosio really deserves a lot of credit. Hopefully, Wood will be able to pitch well consistently and we can get Hamels. That would be quite an imposing rotation, even though I am pretty sure that either Garza or Dempster will be traded by deadline.

    • Cubs Dude

      It seemed everyone always loved Rothschild, and I don’t feel like he got sh*t out of the pitchers the last several years. He sucked. It’s amazing how bad you can see someone is at their job now that we have some coaches and front office people who know something.

      • calicubsfan007

        I remember people saying that the Cubs pitching won’t be as good as last year after Rothschild left. Whenever I watched the pitching closely, I noticed that a ton of our pitchers had horrible throwing motions. This led to them getting a. demolished b. a permanent residency on the DL and/or c. being average at best. This year, just about everyone (except for Marmol) has a different motion that looks way more fluid and less injury causing. Comparison only makes Rothschild look stupider.

        • Edwin

          I’m curious, which pitchers had horrible throwing motions? Other than Mark Prior and Kerry Wood, I haven’t heard much about the Cubs pitchers having poor pitching mechanics. Also, which pitchers look better under Bosio than Rothschild? The only pitchers that have been under both are Dempster, Wells, Marmol, Maine, Wood, Russell, and Samardzija. I think most of those pitchers have had success under both Rothschild and Bosio. Some are even doing worse under Bosio than they did with Rothschild.

          Under Rothschild, from 2002-2010 the Cubs were 9th in fWAR. They were 1st in K/9, 8th in K/BB, 7th in ERA-, 2nd in FIP-, 2nd in xFIP-, and 1st in SIERA.

          The comparision I’m seeing is that Rothschild was a pretty good pitching coach, at least according to the results. Around the league he is a very respected pitching coach as well. I like Bosio, but I don’t think he’s that much better than Rothschild. I just don’t understand why people dislike Rothschild so much.

          • King Jeff

            Are you saying Prior had bad mechanics? I always thought his solid, consistent pitching motion was one of the reasons he was so highly regarded.

            • Edwin

              It depends who you ask. He pitched with the “Inverted W”. Google “Mark Prior Chris O’Leary”. Chris likes to analyze pitching mechanics, and he’ll tell you that the inverted W is a Terrible Thing, and that it ruined Mark Prior’s career. His argument has some merit, although I think his sampling is a little suspect, and he makes some assumptions that are very difficult to prove. The main thing I take away from it is that pitching is a very complex thing, and it’s hard to identify one “perfect” way to throw a baseball.

              I think getting hit in the elbow with a line drive, and hurting his shoulder running into Marcus Giles, which resulted in Prior pitching while hurt for a lot innings, also had something to do with his injury problems.

              • King Jeff

                That’s a good read and an interesting take. I was always of the opinion that the collision and Dusty Baker had more to do with it than anything else, but there might be something to that. All the scouting reports on him always talked about how big his legs were and how much stress that would take off his arm. It makes you wonder if he could have had a long career with a more conventional arm angle.

                • ferrets_bueller

                  Had he kept his elbows down, he could have been a HOF’r, IMO.  I think Smoltz is the perfect comparison- he changed his mechanics, stayed healthy as a result, and ended up just as effective.  Of course, Prior unfortunately never had any coaches who weren’t too ‘old school’ to realize what was going on at all, and he destroyed his arm as a result.

                  • Cubs Dude

                    If you’re right about Prior being a HOF’er if he changed his mechanics I wonder what that would have done to the Cubs over the last 8 years. Sad to think about what could have been. When him and Wood were great there was nothing like that 1, 2 combo.

                    • ferrets_bueller

                      Definitely.  Although Wood is a guy who’s career path couldn’t be changed, IMO.  You could try to change some things, but I think he was pretty much destined to become a reliever from the start.  Although, he could have been one of the best ever, had he been moved to the pen earlier.

            • hansman1982

              Not sure if serious so…

              Prior was HIGHLY regarded for his “perfect” mechanics. Unfortunately, the people who were saying it apparently didn’t watch video of him and someone like Maddux, Clemens, Johnson, etc… side by side. Prior pitching with the “Inverted W” which is now viewed as more negative. It is actually the same thing Strasburg has and the Nationals should ride the shit out of him before his arm explodes.

              • BleedBlueinWNeb

                personally, i think Prior was a PED user. not fair to judge or make assumptions i guess, but that train left the station long ago as far as baseball and the handling of the whole issue. And since we know Clemens was a juicer i think it’s fair to assume tons of pitchers were juicing and i think Prior was one of them.

              • DocPeterWimsey

                The pitcher to whom they compared Prior was Tom Seaver: their motions were nearly identical, and very intentionally so on Prior’s part.

                The big mechanical difference was 110th pitch: although Seaver K’d a lot of guys, his walks were low even for that time (the strike zone was a lot bigger and although walks were held against pitchers, they were not held in favor of batters) and lineups besides the Cubs featured 3-4 guys who’s job was to not strike out by slapping the first or second pitch into play.

                • ferrets_bueller

                  Not really.

                  Those were the flawed comparisons- Seaver and Prior’s mechanics are nearly identical, with one difference- the elbows.

                  This is why some people thought Prior was perfect.  Seaver is generally regarded to have, along with Ryan, one of the most perfect deliveries.  Prior’s is extremely similar, except prior to begining to bring his arms forward, he rotates his elbows up.  Creating………the inverted W.  Seaver didn’t, and his elbows were NEVER above his shoulders.

                  Thats a the fatal flaw, and the fatal difference between the two otherwise perfect motions.

                  Look at a picture/video of Seaver, and then look at Prior.  Elbows.

            • ferrets_bueller

              There were two schools of thought on Prior, prior to his being drafted.

               

              Those who incorrectly thought that his mechanics were ‘flawless,’ and those who weren’t idiots.

              His mechanics were deeply flawed, as a result of his raising of his elbows to a level higher than his shoulders, creating an ‘inverted W.’   Something that, without any deviance that I know of, has lead to injury filled careers in every case.  As far as I know, the healthiest/most successful inverted W guy was John Smoltz.  And he wasn’t exactly the picture of health. (he also wasnt as extreme of a case, and it improved later in his career…as did his health)

              Seriously, though- EVERY one of these guys who has made it to the majors has had issues.

               

              The Twins are often said to have taken Mauer over prior to save money, and because he was local.  But the organization’s dislike of Prior’s mechanics also played a role.

              • Edwin

                Obviously, Prior’s pitching mechanics were over hyped. I think it’s stupid to label any pitcher’s mechanics as “perfect”. But that doesn’t mean that Prior had terrible mechanics. And just because Prior used the inverted W and got injured doesn’t prove it was the inverted W that caused those injuries.

                Prior hurt his shoulder during a collision, and then pitched through his injured shoulder. I would assume that would have had something to do with his injuries. He got hit in the elbow with a line drive. I assume that also had something to do with his injuries. Some of his injuries weren’t even elbow/shoulder related, as I think he had a pulled hamstring from running the bases.

                • DocPeterWimsey

                  Fundamentally, this is the source of the “pitch count” vs. “mechanics” argument.  The latter holds that there are certain mechanics that let pitchers keep going a long time.  The problem is that for every example of a guy who pitched a while with a style, there are guys who blew out that arms with that style: and every style decried as horrible has examples of guys who pitched a while.

                  The pitch count school holds that all pitching mechanics are bad for your arm.  So, the best motion is the one never used.

                  • ferrets_bueller

                    I challenge anyone to find me a starting pitcher who raised his elbows over his shoulders, and didn’t get hurt.  Because there isn’t one.

                    Your argument is valid, except for this one exception- guys who throw like Prior, Strassburg, Waino, etc… every one has had a major surgery. Every one.

                    • Edwin

                      There are plenty of pitchers who don’t raise their elbows above their shoulders, and they get hurt as well. Almost every pitcher ever ends up having surgery or missing games, regardless of delivery. What you’re tyring to prove is that Inverted W pitchers get injured at a higher frequency. Since it’s your theory that the inverted W always results in an injury, you should provide enough evidence to make your theory valid. I’m not trying to prove your theory, so why should I have to look up evidence?

            • Ivy Walls

              He had that “W” which is what Strasberg has, and what some are saying is the cause of problems.

          • Cubs Dude

            “I just don’t understand why people dislike Rothschild so much.” I thought everyone loved Rothschild. Everything, I have ever heard of him was how great he was. I got sick of everyone jocking him, and I just didn’t think he got much out the pitchers the last few years. He reminds me of Mike Tyce with the Bears. People say what a great coach O line coach Tyce was all the time. And the Bears had the worse line in football the last 2 yrs under Tyce. Just my thoughts…

            • Smitty

              Tice can’t do much with the garbage they have given him to work with the last few years.

              • Cubs Dude

                True, but that was an embarrassment the last 2 years.

            • Edwin

              That’s cool. I guess I just seem to see a lot of fans bashing Rothschild for Wood and Prior, and drills involving a towel. When teams don’t do as expected, fans like to blame people, and pitching/hitting coaches are very easy to blame.

            • djriz

              was the problem tice or the personnel he had or the archiac offensive system the bears were using?

              • Ivy Walls

                The problem was last year outside of Listach the Cubs coaches were way over their heads. Sveum attracted no nonsense workmanlike coaches from Quirk to McKay to Bosio and Jaramillo all are coaches-coaches. Good coaches work on two things; fundamentals and the approach, this team appears to be executing on them.

                • Drew

                  You know Jaramillo was here last year too, right?

  • GDB

    How long do the Cubs have control of Samardzija?

    He signed a major league deal back in 2007, but presumably we still get the normal number of years of control once he started accruing service time. I’d guess he’ll have 3/4 years of service time by the end of this year, so does that mean 2 years more control?

    Please correct the above if i’ve got it all ass backwards…

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      Cubs get 6 years of big league service time. Assuming he stays on the big league roster for most of the rest of this year, he’ll be first-time arbitration-eligible next year (and he’s gonna get PAID in his arbitration years if he keeps pitching like this), and the Cubs will have him for two more years after that. He won’t be a free agent until 2016.

      • djriz

        so he’ll be able to pitch in the 2015 world series.

  • JB88

    I’m thinking the Anigo Montoya comment needs to be edited from: “Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die” to “Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You K’d my father. Prepare to die.”

    • Joe

      YES.

      Or maybe, “You HR’d last inning. Prepare to die.” Old school vengeance…

      • Smitty

        Just don’t say you are hitting him to be “old school” or you will get a 5 game suspension. absurd they did that to hamels.

        • djriz

          5 game suspension for starting pitcher = worthless.

          and he was suspended for his mouth, not hitting the batter.

        • MikeL

          What is really stupid about what Hamels did is that he ran his mouth. Now any time he tries to pitch inside and if he hits a batter (even if he isn’t doing it intentionally) the umpires might run him from the game when they wouldn’t have before.

          • Cubs Dude

            I agree. I thought Hamels was smarter than to say that he did it on purpose. Clearly pitchers hit batters all the time on purpose, but you never admit too it, that’s just dumb. I really do think it is Hamels trying to look like a badass. But what is the point of the 5 game suspension? You pushed his next start back 1 day, way to bring it Selig… If this was the NFL Goddell would have suspended him for the year.

  • Patrick

    So… just out of curiosity, have we heard at what point they’ll shut him down this season? I can’t imagine they let him go more than, what 150-170 innings?

    • calicubsfan007

      Good point, we can’t afford to Mark Prior him. That would be a shame. Damn Dusty Baker for ruining some of our best pitchers.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      Yeah, I’m guessing that’s the range. They’re going to try and limit his innings throughout the year (which is tough, because he’s pitching so damn well), and they’ll skip him from time to time like they did a couple weeks ago. But, ultimately – especially if the Cubs are bad by August – he’ll be shut down in late August or September.

      • Patrick

        He’s at 38 innings now. If he averaged 6 innings per start (he’s at 6.1) he would get essential 26 starts so that means he would have to be shut down after 26 starts, or around game 130 or so. I would kind of love it if they could keep him pitching all year, just space out the starts.

        The Cubs only play 3 games between July 8 and July 17 but let’s hope he gets an inning in the All star game…. I dunno, I would just prefer to see him pitching in September once or twice, maybe on 10 days rest each time. He would normally get 5 starts in September based on the schedule, you could get him 3 off in September, one or two in July… then one more somewhere else.

        But what do I know?

  • BleedBlueinWNeb

    the LaHair story is great, but at the end of the day if he can’t play the outfield in the big leagues he’s going to be traded this year! i’m sure they’ll get Rizzo up sometime and give LaHair a chance to show what he can do in the outfield. if it works out then they’ve got them both. if not , then LaHair is gone for some top prospects.

    i am guessing that if they try him in the outfield and it doesn’t work that it might decrease his trade value a little bit, as teams will know the cubs need to get rid of him. So there’s a chance i guess that they won’t even mess with the outfield experiment, and just let it ride, and when someone (phils, giants) need a big lefty bat later on they just pull the trigger on the deal.

    mlbtraderumors had a nice trade candidate piece on LaHair the other day.

    He’s been so fun to watch this season and you get the sense that he’s here to stay as a MLB power hitting first baseman. just hope he can convert to the outfield and be serviceable out there so we can keep him and have Rizzo.

    quite the predicament for theo and jed…

    • Cubs Dude

      I love Lahair, but I don’t see him manning leftfield everyday when Rizzo is up. With the Front Office putting an emphasis on run prevention and the Cubs stock pile of outfielders it doesn’t seem a good fit. Lahair is a big guy and not graceful in the slightest. My bet is they trade him when his value is as high as it can get this summer. He’s only been the best first baseman in baseball, he has to have some strong value (regardless of age) to a team with a need at first right? He’ll be cheap for awhile too. Lets see some top pitching prospects!!

      • King Jeff

        You are aware of the current left fielders defensive prowess are you not? LaHair does have some outfield experience, and he can’t be much worse than Soriano. While trading him for prospects makes all kinds of sense, keeping him and putting him in left isn’t exactly a worse case scenario. His defense might be below average, but his bat and presence in this lineup is not. Having LaHair and Rizzo in the same lineup has to be pretty tempting to the them.

        • BleedBlueinWNeb

          i’m sure both avenue are tempting…keep him in LF and have him in the same lineup with Rizzo AND deal him for a great haul of prospects. just not sure how many prospects and what caliber the cubs could get for him.

        • Cubs Dude

          Yes King Jeff, I am well aware of the train wreck we have in left field now… It’s not my first rodeo with Soriano. All I am saying is that if they could get some strong pitching prospects for LaHair, I think Theo would love to get a better defensive outfield. Like I said I do love LaHair and hope everything works out well for him and the Cubs.

          • King Jeff

            At this point, I don’t think his value on the trade market is as much as it is to the Cubs offense. I also think that if they hold onto him and he keeps hitting, his value will do nothing but go up. He already plays a passable first base, and he can DH, so I don’t think moving to the outfield for the last couple of months of the year for the Cubs, would do anything to hurt his trade value. It might even increase it. The only hangup I have with LaHair playing the outfield is that he has had back issues early this year. Otherwise, I think he’s an adequate replacement for Soriano, and his offense would outweigh the advantage of playing a more defensive minded left fielder.

    • Dave

      I don’t think you can get a any top prospects for LaHair.
      Regardless of what he has done this season teams are going to put more weight into the fact that he is 29 year old career minor leaguer.

  • BleedBlueinWNeb

    cubs dude– couldn’t agree more. it’s too bad that he’s been (along w/ shark) the big bright spot that he’s been to this point and we’re talking about him being dealt. but clearly when he runs the bases you can see he’s probably not gonna be a big league OF. yes, he’ll be a huge addition to a team w/ a need at first. this regime is clearly hitching its wagon at first to Rizzo.

    what does everyone think about the way this will play out? will the cubs even try him in the OF to see if it could work, or will that possibly hurt his trade value to the point that they won’t even try it and instead just deal him for the best package of prospects possible?

    it sucks, but i think he’s gone sometime this year.

    • Cubs Dude

      I think Seattle is a great fit for the Cubs and LaHair. I know they had LaHair before he broke out a few years ago. They have a TON of pitching prospect and been offensively weak for years. I don’t think Smoak is the answer for Seattle, as he’s struggled. I also love Kyle Seager over there, he would look great for the Cubs manning 2nd.

      • Patrick

        Seattle is not giving up on Smoak for at least another season, and they have several 1B options, including potentially Jesus Montero. They also don’t look likely to give up Kyle Seager anytime soon.

    • djriz

      One thing to think about is how Rizzo handles the Majors this time around. If you trade LaHair when Rizzo is brought up, and Rizzo then shows he’s not ready/ or an AAAA player, we’re screwed.
      We have enough players on the roster who play multiple positions that keeping LaHair wouldn’t hurt them.
      Now, if some team offers a great pitching prospect, you do it and take your chances, but you don’t do it if you get just ‘a guy’.

  • Jeremy

    Does anyone think that we could easily build a contending rotation around Garza and Shark. Both of them are starting to enter there prime and Shark is really beginning to prove that he is a top of the rotation starter.

  • http://bleachernation.com RicoSanto

    You have to keep LaHair.He will be extremely cheap for the next few years and have great production.Theo is the one who said There are no 4a players.is was a great decision made by him that is looking very good.He is not going to trade him.Add a FA Bat,and Rizzo and a FA good starter they will be very competetive next year.He will finsih with at least 30 HRS and a .400 OBP, Theos kind of Numbers.

  • Eric

    Well we have 2 aces in Garza and Shark. You could even say Dempster is pitching like an Ace right now. I am certain Demp will accept a trade to a contender because he said as much in the offseason. Question is do you want 2 aces going forward, or do you trade one Ace (Garza) for 2 really solid high ceiling players who are just about the age of being ready for MLB (maybe 23-24) at positions of need, for the offense?

Bleacher Nation Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Bleacher Nation is a private media site, and it is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago Cubs. Neither MLB nor the Chicago Cubs have endorsed, supported, directed, or participated in the creation of the content at this site, or in the creation of the site itself. It's just a media site that happens to cover the Chicago Cubs.

Bleacher Nation is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

Google+