Quantcast

According to Yancen Pujols of the Caribbean, a Dominican media outlet, Carlos Marmol says he’s been traded to the Angels. Given the timing, if it’s true, it seems like Dan Haren will be involved.

Obviously I’ll have many updates as soon as possible.

UPDATE 1 (6:44pm CT): Pujols quotes Marmol as saying (rough translation), “I am very fond of the City of Chicago. It will always be in my heart. Now I look up to the challenge with Anaheim.”

UPDATE 2 (6:46pm CT): Lots of other quotes from Marmol in Pujols’ Twitter stream, all basically saying the same kind of thing – lots of teams interested in me, but the Angels give me a chance to win, I’m excited about it, I love Chicago, etc.

UPDATE 3 (6:47pm CT): Gordon Wittenmyer says a Cubs source has confirmed that Marmol has been traded to the Angels for Haren.

UPDATE 4 (6:49pm CT): I’m still waiting on the particulars of the deal – money, any other players involved, etc. – before reacting. If it’s a straight up swap, with Angels covering the $3.5 million buyout amount, I think it’s decent. Still processing. After a solid first half of 2013 by each, Haren is more flippable for good value than Marmol, so there’s that.

UPDATE 5 (6:53pm CT): Mike DiGiovanna, LA Times writer, says the Angels are “on the verge” of trading Haren for Marmol.

UPDATE 6 (6:56pm CT): Bruce Levine reports it as though it’s a done deal. Carrie Muskat notes that the Cubs aren’t willing to confirm it just yet (finalizing some details?). Jon Heyman also says it’s a done deal (at least the Haren part).

UPDATE 7 (7:01pm CT): Ok, here’s your this-thing-just-happened-10-minutes-ago-but-you-might-want-a-reaction: The best the Cubs could have hoped for in dealing Marmol in a standalone deal is getting a decent, top 20ish in a system prospect if they kicked in $5ish million of his $9.8 million salary. The best the Cubs could have hoped for in acquiring Haren is giving up someone like Junior Lake, and taking on most of the $15.5 million post-option money owed Haren (let’s say $14 million). So, if they were separate deals, it would be the Cubs sending Lake, Marmol, and $5 million for Haren, and a prospect slightly worse than Lake. Unless my math is off because I’m rushing, this looks like a great deal for the Cubs.

UPDATE 8 (7:09pm CT): Dave Kaplan says multiple sources on each side say the deal is not done quite yet. It’s progressing, but there are financial aspects to be worked out. Based on my little exercise in Update 7, I’d think some money is going to the Angels. And I’d think the Commissioner’s Office has to approve, which is why we aren’t getting official confirmation from the teams yet.

UPDATE 9 (7:11pm CT): Should have checked my various communications methods a little earlier – a source tells me the same thing as Kap. Not quite done yet, with some details yet to be worked out. Looking good, though.

UPDATE 10 (7:22pm CT): Still digging, but a source suggests there’s more than just money being haggled (i.e., another player/prospect in the deal – not sure on which side, but I’d have to assume it’s the Cubs sending out a player).

UPDATE 11 (7:33pm CT): Well, Matt Garza is pretty convinced that Haren is coming to the Cubs, with Marmol going to the Angels.

UPDATE 12 (7:43pm CT): Oh my, forgot about this – Marmol has a limited no-trade clause. Alden Gonzalez says he waived it to go to the Angels, so it may have been a total non-issue, but it’s something to remember when evaluating the trade.

UPDATE 13 (7:53pm CT): DiGiovanna got ahold of Haren who says he hasn’t heard from either the Angels or Cubs, but is “assuming it’s done.”

UPDATE 14 (7:58pm CT): You knew this was coming. You knew it. Alden Gonzalez (Angels beat guy for MLB.com) says the reports of a deal are premature, and the Angels are still negotiating with at least one other team. I told you it wasn’t a done deal …

UPDATE 15 (8:03pm CT): The reasonable fear here is that the Cubs contacted Marmol to ask him *if* he would waive his NTC to go to the Angels, he said yes, the Cubs went back to the table, and in the meantime, Marmol told a local reporter. Enter Twitter, asplode head.

UPDATE 16 (8:23pm CT): Well, Marmol spoke to a Dominican radio station moments ago as though it was a done deal. That makes me suspect more strongly that the issue is the Commissioner approval thing or minor other players thing. Seems like if there were still negotiations going on, the Cubs would have gotten ahold of Marmol by now to say, “Dude. Stop.”

UPDATE 17 (8:29pm CT): Ken Rosenthal says the same thing as Gonzalez (not done), and says essentially what I feared was the case – the Cubs asked Marmol if he’d accept a deal to the Angels, and the reporting ball unraveled from there.

UPDATE 18 (8:34pm CT): Really didn’t think this would make it to 18 updates. Dave Kaplan says it’s not done, and the hold-up is the review of financials and medicals.

UPDATE 19 (8:41pm CT): Now this is weird. Rosenthal says the decision is up to Marmol now. Which, I mean, he’s the one who leaked the whole thing, and gave an interview saying he was going to the Angels. So, I mean, if Rosie’s right, what’s the holdup?

UPDATE 20 (8:54pm CT): The original reporter, Yancen Pujols, who spoke to Marmol, is sticking by his story. He’s saying, if my rough translation is accurate, that Marmol told him he’d already waived his NTC.

UPDATE 21 (9:14pm CT): A source tells the AP that the trade has been agreed to by both sides, but is not finalized.

UPDATE 22 (9:16pm CT): Gordon is sticking by his story, and has a source that insists Marmol has signed off on the deal. All this fretting might be for nothing – we might simply be waiting for Commission sign-off, which is a formality. Or, we’re waiting on some horrible disaster to arise. You know, whichever.

UPDATE 23 (9:19pm CT): Source tells me there are no major issues, it’s just a matter of negotiating the finer points. In other words, according to the source, the main components of the deal are agreed to, and aren’t falling through.

UPDATE 24 (9:21pm CT): And then in unison, all the beat writers in Chicago tweet essentially the same thing: a Cubs source says there is no deal.

UPDATE 25 (9:25pm CT): Gordon recants in the most authoritative fashion, saying his source tells him “there won’t be a deal.”

UPDATE 26 (9:27pm CT): National media jumping on and saying the deal is off. Rosenthal says Marmol agreed, but then the Cubs pulled the deal. Let’s not jump to conclusions, because we don’t know the whole story. It could be that the money wasn’t settled yet, and the Cubs just couldn’t agree to the Angels’ requests. It could be that Haren’s medicals looked worse than they expected. We’ll probably never know, which is the most frustrating part of all.

UPDATE 27 (9:39pm CT): Bruce Levine, one of many, many to “confirm” a done deal, isn’t quite ready to throw in the towel. He says the deal is not dead, but “unlikely at this point.”

UPDATE 28 (10:00pm CT): We’re one hour from the option deadline for Haren. It occurs to me that if the Angels don’t end up trading him, and just decline the option in an hour, that’s pretty good evidence that Haren’s medicals were the issue. If there were multiple suitors – and by all accounts, there were – and the Angels were motivated to move him. If they bail completely from that plan, it’s because they couldn’t move him.

UPDATE 29 (11:11pm CT): It’s all over, people. The Angels just declined Haren’s option (paying him a $3.5 million buyout in the process), and he’s now a free agent. The fact that they had to do that after supposedly being in conversations with teams all night long, coupled with the fact that the Cubs clearly had a deal in place with Marmol and subsequently backed out, tells me it was an issue with Haren’s medicals. The Cubs saw something they didn’t like, or at least that they tried to leverage into a better deal. And the deal fell apart. That’s all she wrote. I feel bad for Haren, whose agent is going to have some serious explaining to do when he tries to solicit a big contract.

  • cerambam

    squeel

  • PeteG

    Wow, please be true! Haren is a beast #NextYearIsHere haha.

  • cerambam

    if only i could EDIT that i would have said “preemptive squeel”

  • Dr. Percival Cox

    I would really hope it’s more than just Haren coming if Marmol was the price — but perhaps competition raised the price.

    • Sinnycal

      One year of a once-dominant closer coming off a down year for one year of a once-dominant starter coming off a down year doesn’t strike me as much of an overpay, particularly if it’s a straight contract swap.

    • EvenBetterNewsV2.0

      Are you serious? Wow… Marmol has very little trade value at his price. Haren atleast gives us a chance at getting something in the summer.

    • cubchymyst

      I agree, the Angels are looking to free up money for a run at Greinke so I’m assuming the Cubs are kicking in some money as well. Can’t wait for a full write-up

  • Sweetjamesjones

    I dont even know what to say…

  • North Side Irish

    There aren’t any 10-5 right or NTC issues here, correct? I would think the Cubs are getting more players or cash…

  • TonyP

    holy chit

  • MXB

    Here’s hoping (far-fetched…i know) that the trade is Haren and Romine for Marmol and probably Vitters

    • hansman1982

      No way angels want Vitters

      • MXB

        yeah, I know. I like Romine at 3B (stable defense, some pop at PCL)

      • fromthemitten

        they are lacking in the 3B department…

  • TWC

    GadZOOKS!

  • Segal27

    DAY = MADE

  • tjtrigo

    The off-season is here! For a Cubs fan, that is exciting!

  • Huch

    Who is going to close for the Cubs then?

    • North Side Irish

      you’re assuming they will have a lead at some point…

    • Njriv

      You dont really need a closer on a rebuilding team. The Cubs can find a closer from within, and go by committee for this year, or maybe sign someone like Soria.

    • fromthemitten

      RYAN DEMPSTER

  • TonyP

    So Thed thinks Haren will bring more/better prospects at next years trade deadline than Marmol will?

    • Dr. Percival Cox

      This would appear to be the case. If Haren has even a decent year, it’s hard to argue with the logic.

  • Dr. Percival Cox

    Why would the Angels have to cover a buyout? Wasn’t the option picked up before the trade?

    • EvenBetterNewsV2.0

      Because they would have had to pay it if we didn’t trade for him by 11pm.

  • Believe in 2015

    THEO AND CO COME THROUGH AGAIN!!!!
    Nice job Cubbies! Good luck Marmol (wild thing) in LA

  • Mike S

    Can we get a squeel picture!?!? I mean, Garza Samardzja and Haren…thats a core group. Best move by Thed so far IMO

  • Rob

    Brett this is one of the good days of being a cubs fan.

  • Njriv

    Now if we sign another pitcher and another bat in the OF, fill in the bench and bullpen with a few lesser contracts or so, this team wont be too bad.

  • Jeff1969

    I know Haren is just better deadline bait than Marmol, but I think its important for our young Cubs to at least feel competitive out on the field for a little part of the season while the whole thing gets rebuilt. Nice move.

  • morgan

    yeah i think haren will be better in the nl, with him and garza atop the rotation, this team wont be as bad as last year thats for sure, and the nl doesnt have any real dominate teams, that could change at the end of the off season, but the cards and giants were good but nothing special in term of talent, add few more pieces and who knows

    • Cyranojoe

      Can you really say that a bounceback Haren — and we’re betting on a bounceback rather than a regression — is significantly better than the 2012 Dempster playing out of his mind?

      • fromthemitten

        Haren’s younger and has a better track record

        • fromthemitten

          and Haren/Dempster comparisons are irrelevant because Haren won’t have no-trade rights limiting the # of teams he could pitch for and you should really be comparing the value of Haren and Marmol

          • Cyranojoe

            Youth = good point. No NTC = stellar point! But what is the track record, in terms of numbers? Brett said he tops out at a 2/3, right? I think I saw that on Twitter. And I’m guessing here, Demp is/was a 3, though I personally think he was pitching like a 2 early last year.

            • fromthemitten

              Haren has a career 3.66 ERA and has been durable. Dempster is a 4.33 ERA and has only gone below 3.66 3 seasons as a starter

              • Ted

                I think you’re missing the point mitten. You said this would make us better than last year. Last year, Dempster did very well for us while he was here regardless of his career numbers. Haren will at best do that well, but likely will not. It’s good we got him — our staff was gutted by trades and he could pan out very nicely. But let’s not get our hopes too out of line on 11/2/2012.

                • fromthemitten

                  I was referring to his value as a trade chip over Dempster, the Cubs don’t have a good enough lineup to contend regardlesss

                  • http://casualcubsfan.blogger.com hansman1982

                    I dunno, It is interesting, I think with a healthy Haren, surprise contributions from 3B and RF, Soriano not negatively regressing the 2013 Cubs could be surprisingly competative. But this fits my theory – needing 6 things to go right this year to contend. (add in Castillo, and BP)

        • Ted

          I think the point was that he’s unlikely to outperform 2011 first-half Dempster — not only is a bounceback far from certain, but Dempster had a GREAT run with us last year. Given that, Haren’s presence doesn’t put us above last year (“this team wont be as bad as last year”), at most it equalizes us with last year. (Which of course, is necessary! We shipped off what little was good last year.)

          • Cyranojoe

            That’s the feeling I have. Not to say I’m unhappy with the trade! I even expect we have to give up a prospect — hopefully getting one back — and it’s looking like a good deal for both sides, in my ever-so knowledgeable opinion, LOL.

  • Beer Baron

    That’s a good deal for both teams. They got a very good reliever in exchange for a guy they were a few hours from cutting. We get a potentially top of the rotation starter (albeit for a lot of money). Assuming there isn’t more to it (ie we gave up a prospect), I’m very happy.

    So who’s the closer next year?

  • JoeyCollins

    Man I love updates

  • the jackal

    harens presttty good i believe hes on downhill slide he gives up alot of HRs if anything else we can swap him which im sure is in plans

  • BarkTwiceBaxter

    This a great trade Haren has at least 5 good years left. A closer can be developed during the rebuild. 1/2 years away!

  • the jackal

    doc we need some stats here lol

  • Cubbie Blues

    Straight-up swap wound be awesome.

  • Featherstone

    Wow this deal actually makes a lot of sense for both teams. Assuming the Angels kick in the 3.5 mil for the buyout as well its essentially a wash money wise as well.

  • http://ehanauer.com clark addison

    Garza isn’t a sure thing. His elbow problem cost him nearly half a season, and he hasn’t started throwing yet.

    And who is going to close?

    Just saying.

    • Njriv

      The plan is for Garza to start throwing in December. A rebuilding team doesn’t really need a closer. For now, the Cubs can use a closer from within and go by committee, or sign someone like a Soria. A closer is the last thing that needs to be developed.

      • fromthemitten

        Probably an in-house competition in spring training wouldn’t be surprised if by the end of the season it’s Vizcaino if he doesn’t pan out as a starter

  • ferrets_bueller

    This is an absolutely MASSIVE win for the Cubs. Holy shit.

  • Rob

    Anyone know who we would have at 3b since we had no production at all this year between vitters and valbuena and good ole ian stewart

    • fromthemitten

      I don’t think Theo/Jed know…

    • Njriv

      I think they are going to stick with Stewart for one more season. I would not mind if they did. Now that he should be fully healthy, lets see a what a fully healthy Ian Stewart can do for a whole season. If he doesn’t do well, then we’ll know for sure and just move on.

    • Ted

      Stewart’s while-healthy ~.780 OPS is on the lower end of league median. Given there’s little else out there at value, the Stewart/Valbuena/Vitters(?) carousel is probably best served to keep spinning.

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+