Quantcast

We know how this dance goes, but here’s what’s being reported …

Jon Heyman says the Chicago Cubs have agreed to terms with free agent pitcher Carlos Villanueva, and Ken Rosenthal says the Cubs are “close” to signing him. I cannot appropriately caution you enough – no signing is official. But these credible reports say the Cubs are very close to agreeing, or have already agreed, with Villanueva on a deal. No word on the terms yet.

The signing, if it goes through, would be the Cubs’ third (possible) starting pitcher signing of the Winter, after Scott Baker and Scott Feldman, and would give them six legitimate starting options. What the signing would mean for the Cubs’ pursuit of Edwin Jackson, if that is still ongoing, remains unclear. Villanueva, 29, was a guy I mentioned back in September as a reasonable target for the Cubs, so the signing doesn’t come as a complete shock.

He is looking for a starting job, so you’ve got to figure the Cubs have some intentions of giving him a shot. He can also work in a swing role, however, as he’s done for the last couple years. Before we hear more, it’s probably not accurate to say he’s definitely being signed as a starter.

Many updates to follow …

UPDATE (6:05pm CT): It’s fair to wonder if Villanueva was a back-up plan to the back-up plan that was Edwin Jackson. His signing gives the Cubs six starters, and it would be hard to convince Jackson to come on board as well, unless one of the Scotts is being displaced from the rotations (seems like a dick move), or Baker isn’t going to be ready until much later in the season than suspected (haven’t heard anything like that), or there are concerns about Matt Garza’s recovery (haven’t heard anything like that), or the Cubs plan to trade a pitcher, or the Cubs plan to use Villanueva out of the pen.

UPDATE 2 (6:10pm CT): I’ve mentioned it before, but since I’m doing the updating thing, I’ll mention it again – for his career, Villanueva has been much better out of the bullpen (3.76 ERA, 1.230 WHIP) than out of the rotation (4.80 ERA, 1.365 WHIP). Then again, the only season in his career where he pitched exclusively out of the bullpen (2010), his K-rate was huge (11.4 per 9), but his ERA was 4.61 and his WHIP was 1.329. This guy is something of an enigma.

UPDATE 3 (6:23pm CT): Another I’m-digging-around-at-the-stats-while-I-wait-on-more-info update – in 2012, as a starter, Villanueva’s advanced stats were really excellent. His K% was 22.9% (good), his BB% was 6.7% (good) (and very good when you put those two together), and his xFIP was 3.97 (good). Add in a 1.22 WHIP, and you’ve got a guy who was a pretty darn good back-of-the-rotation starter in 2012 on just about any team.

UPDATE 4 (6:25pm CT): Gordon Wittenmyer says there “appears to be actual traction” to these reports, and then he made a joke about Villanueva taking the offer back to the Jays. *ba-dum-ching*

UPDATE 5 (6:35pm CT): This time Carrie Muskat provides the authoritative “slow your roll,” tweeting that the Cubs are talking to BOTH Villanueva and Jackson right now, and there is nothing done. This is very interesting because not only does it poo-poo Heyman’s report, but it also suggests the Cubs are either indeed pursuing both Villanueva and Jackson to try and sign both, or the Cubs are playing them off of each other to try and get the best deal from one of them. Seems like the latter is more likely, given the rotation, but I’d be very intrigued if it’s the former.

UPDATE 6 (6:37pm CT): Worth pointing out, by the way, that the Muskat tweet is her confirmed serious interest by the Cubs in Jackson. Obviously we all pretty much believed that was true at this point, but it’s a nice additional log on the fire.

UPDATE 7 (6:39pm CT): Patrick Mooney makes it sound like Villanueva is going to happen, “Cubs working toward finalizing agreement with Carlos Villanueva, to create depth and competition within rotation.” He tends not to say things like that if they’re likely to fall through. Depth and competition are good things, and suggest that no promises have been made. Also a good thing.

UPDATE 8 (6:40pm CT): Oh my, a very interesting tweet from Heyman: “Edwin Jackson is in play for #cubs. #rangers have some interest. #padres stopped at 3 yrs and bowed out yesterday.” Given that Heyman is the one who reported the Villanueva signing, this strongly suggests the Cubs are indeed in on BOTH pitchers. Or Heyman forgot what he said 30 minutes ago and is regurgitating stuff we already knew …

UPDATE 9 (7:01pm CT): Phil Rogers agrees with Muskat that the Cubs are closing in on Villanueva, but it definitely isn’t done. And they are also interested in Edwin Jackson – as in, the Cubs want to sign both.

UPDATE 10 (7:05pm CT): I said it earlier, but I’ll say it more plainly here: if the Cubs do indeed sign both Villanueva and Jackson (heck, the fact that they want to sign both), you’ve got to wonder about the Baker and Garza rehabs. Baker was supposed to be ready to go in April, and Garza has been throwing and supposedly feeling fine. Maybe they aren’t expected to be ready to go in April after all? Something to consider.

UPDATE 11 (7:19pm CT): There wasn’t too much doubt, but Muskat confirms that the Cubs are going after both Villanueva and Jackson.

UPDATE 12 (7:28pm CT): Cold water from Rosenthal, who says the Indians are also in on Edwin Jackson, and the bidding will go to at least four years (that part was expected, I suppose). At least the Cubs wouldn’t necessarily be bidding against a deep-pocketed, competitive team. Rosenthal says the Indians probably couldn’t get both Nick Swisher and Jackson, so there’s a rooting interest for you.

UPDATE 13 (7:45pm CT): Heyman says the Edwin Jackson bidding is up around four years and $50 million, which is in the area of what I expected. Probably a bit more money, even. As for Villanueva, no one has yet even speculated on the terms. Two years and $10 to $12 million? One year and an option? That’s me speculating.

UPDATE 14 (8:08pm CT): Muskat did a full write-up on these twin rumors, so she’s got some very good sources tonight (she tends not to do full write-ups on these things unless she’s reached a certain level of confidence). It doesn’t add a ton more that we didn’t already hear tonight, but she suggests that the Cubs’ official line on adding two more starters would be concerns about depth in the face of Baker recovering from Tommy John surgery, and Garza recovering from his elbow injury. The Villanueva deal, by the way, is in the “finalizing details” stage.

  • Carew

    Hoo boy this is not helping me study. This is way more interesting

    • Rizzo44

      I know. All of this has to be happening this week. I have 3 exams tommorow… Can’t get off Bleacher Nation, MLB Trade Rumors, and Twitter. No studying for me! lol

      • Carew

        oh yikes, I’ve only got one tomorrow…good luck to you my friend

        • Rizzo44

          Yeah it sucks. I have 3 tommorow and 3 Friday… Good luck to you too.

  • http://bleachernation.com frank hutch

    The way this offseason is going we probably wont get either pitcher. Something goofy will happen again

  • farmerjon

    I wonder what samardzijas trade value would be? I dont even know if it’s fair to speculate, but that is a valuable trade chip, much more valuable than Garza. Thoughts on dealing from surplus?

    • Vince

      What if the Cubs feel good about Garza coming back and remaining healthy, so they sign him to an extension. Then they sign Jackson for 4 years and Villanueva for 1 or 2. Then it turns out Texas really likes Samardzija and offers Olt and a top 20 pitching prospect for him. Cubs accept. Cubs’ lower level positional prospects perform well in 2013 and after the 2013 season we trade Castro, Soler, and Vogelbach for David Price. Baez and Almora are ready for 2015. In 2015 we have:

      Price
      Garza
      Jackson
      (one of the Cubs farmhands works out here)
      (insert 5th starter)

      Vizcaino – closer

      And a lineup that includes Rizzo, Olt, Baez, and Almora. We add 1 big bat in free agency that year and we’re good to go.

      World Series! Haha

      • Vince

        Oh yeah, Mark Appel is your 4th starter here…

      • Kevin B

        I do not like that idea at all. I disagree. Trade Shark for Olt and a top 20 pitching prospect? Huh? Maybe if its Perez but then maybe. Olt played briefly in the bigs last year but spent the year in AA. He is a prospect that is all. He is not proven. And if you just get some top 20 prospect from Texas system that may not be a good prospect either so you just lost Shark, a controlable top of the rotation pitcher who is not a prospect but experienced and uptrending, the kind of guy you hope the prospect becomes years later, and lost him for maybe nothing.

        I have no problem extending Garza, he is only 29. He may be more valuable to the Cubs then in a trade anyway. Unless you get a REAL nice package for Garza with at least one blue chip prospect and 2 other good ones they should keep him.

        Also I am not into trading Castro, Soler and Vogelbach for David Price. Tampa would do it in a heartbeat. After the season Price has two more controllable years and he is a Pitcher – can get hurt. Castro is a young elite player at a premium postion in the field. All indications look like Soler is the real deal. Vogelbach looking good but of course low level prospect. Too much to pay. Plus you also will be paying Price through Arbitration 15-20 million each for those 2 years.

        So then how do you replace Castro? Now you are looking to trade for a young shortstop. Good luck with that. Diamondbacks just traded Trevor Bauer for a shortstop prospect who does not appear can even hit. So how are you going to find one. And if you do no one is trading that player and the Cubs should not either.

        Do not tell me Baez. Baez is more likely to be a third baseman or second baseman, his range is average at SS. He may even wind up in the OF. I would never put Castro in a package for Price.

        Just my opinion.

        • Vince

          I think you’re correct in that they could probably get more value than that for Shark.

          However, I think the Tampa trade for Price is very realistic. They will be demanding a huge return for him and they will get one from somebody. Pitching is at a premium and he is a true ace. We may not have to give up all 3 of those guys but I think it’s a realistic trade that could actually happen, unlike most trades that are proposed by fans.

    • Lou

      I think he’s more valuable than Garza because of that team control thing but more of deadline trade if at all.

    • Kevin B

      Why would you want to trade him? He is the type of player the Cubs are trying to acquire. Young top of the rotation type power pitcher. And we control him for three more seasons. He is the type you may want to extend not trade. It has nothing to do with who is more valuable in a trade, yes he is more valuable then Garza who only has this season of control and is both more expensive financially and older by a few years.

      The Cubs may extend Garza otherwise they will turn the short term asset into long term, Shark is not a short term asset. There is no comparison.

      • The Dude

        If they did Shark, I think it would be a case of wish in one hand and *crap* in the other (Sorry I’m crude at times). The Cubs probably wish Dempster would’ve accepted the deal to Atlanta because all reports had Garza to the Dodgers in the works. Unfortunately, Dempster stalled and the rest is history.

        FFWD: Of the course the Cubs would prefer to deal Garza over Shark but that’s just not happening at peak; and the Cubs have the resources to absorb this bump in the road. But Shark … That’s a different story. They have to be thinking that they could get more in return than Garza could ever snatch and spend the dough to cover the losses.

        IMO, it would be a clever way around the whole, “we’ll give you a ton of cash to make this guy fetch better prospects POV.”

        • Kevin B

          The Cubs wanted to trade Dempster first so that the Cubs would not be competing with themselves with Garza and Dempster. I do not know what reports you say had Garza in the works for the Dodgers. The Dodgers could have traded for Garza at anytime, Dempster did not have to go to Atlanta or anywhere first, Garza could have gone first if the Dodgers made the right offer.

          Dodgers do not have a good farm system so not sure what you would want back from them for Garza anyway? They refused to put Zack Lee in play allegedly and frankly Lee is in A ball and just a toolsy prospect at this point who never had real success anywhere, I would not even want him as a centerpiece for Garza, I would rather have Garza.

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

            Lee posted a WHIP of 1.265 with a K/BB of 5.20 in the extremely hitter friendly California League. I think it is safe to say he has had success.

        • The Dude

          I completely agree, Kevin B. The storyline was that the Dodgers had money to burn but didn’t want to deal their top prospects. They were comparing Garza and Dempster; presumably weighing the difference between each stretch run impact pitcher vs prospects required to acquire that talent.

          The Cubs FO knew this and that’s why they had Dempster traded to ATL. That move would’ve put all the leverage in the Cubs’ hands (note: The day the Dempster to ATL trade was “confirmed” reports were already out “touting” the Cubs FO for already having a better return in the works with a Garza/LA trade).

          Long story short, dealing Dempster to ATL for a very good prospect enabled the Cubs to deal Garza to LA for two very good prospects. Dempster stalled, Garza got hurt. The FO can’t predict the future, they can only make moves based on the data available. Turned out shitty, now Garza may be exteded and Shark traded.

  • Spriggs

    I want Jackson.

  • Kevin

    If smardzjia isnt viewed as a top of the rotation SP, then now is the time to trade him. If Cubs can get a major league ready 3b prospect or a young CF go for it

    • DocPeterWimsey

      Unfortunately, MLB-ready young 3Bmen and CFers are in short supply, and it’s not clear that any are really available! (Unless you want an out-machine like Bourjos, and I’d be disappointed if that is all the Cubs got for Smardz., and even more disappointed to see Bourjos in a Cubs uniform….)

      • Kevin

        I understand the supply, but I was trying to say that would be the return I would look for, anything less you would have to keep him. I feel he has very good trade value, unless a team came with a very good package of young prospects

        • DocPeterWimsey

          Oh, I agree. However, who here has had this experience: your significant other says we need something from the store and please get it; you go to the store and they are out OR the only ones they have are from a truly bad brand; your SO gets mad at you anyway.

          The young 3Bmen aisle is pretty empty right now, so we have to look for a different return. The young CFer aisle isn’t bursting, either: yeah, you can get a Bourjos or a Revere, but Consumer Reports says don’t do that.

          The Cubs system also needs pitching, and that might be the one thing that has anything on the shelves.

          • http://facebook legen wait for it dary

            i say we take risk sign grady sizemore to minor league deal he comes back in second half if he doesnt work out who cares worth a try

            • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

              I’d love to see this. A minor league deal would not eat a 40 man slot, so there is absolutely no risk.

              • http://facebook legen wait for it dary

                agreed but would he take a minor league deal

      • #1cubsfan2013

        mlb ready 3rd baseman juan francisco mlb ready CF Jose Constanza+Todd Cunningham for r future CFand pitching prospect Zeke Spruill for shark and Soriano

    • Kevin B

      Kevin agreed IF he is not viewed that way. But he is viewed that way by the Cubs.

  • kranzman54

    I know I said I won’t believe it until I see the final signed numbers, but I feel like we have Villanueva, still sounds very much in the air with Jackson. Who do you think we will move off the 40?

  • cubchymyst

    I have no clue at this point is have no clue what the cubs are planning for the rotation. Wood pitched good and should be given a shot in the rotation. If the plan is to build up trade value then all of Baker, Feldman, and Villanueva would need to be in the rotation. Can’t wait till spring training because that will bring an end to this signing madness … maybe.

    • cubchymyst

      damn need the edit button.

    • kranzman54

      Haha, now the Cubs are signing too much? I guess this FO has no chance.

      BTW this is not a criticism of you, it’s just funny that some say they need to make more big moves and now they are making moves on some nice pitchers and you say I can’t wait for this signing stuff to end.

      • nkniacc13

        Like the multi signings of players that have been bullpen and starters that gives cubs options as long as no promises have been made for rotation spots. Im not concerned about over signings becasue baker likely won’t be redy until the end April

      • cubchymyst

        The signing madness is more due to all of the deals that were done then suddenly not done. or done but not official. I’m excited about the potential signings.

    • Kevin B

      Cubychy;

      I think the plan for the rotation is to let them all COMPETE for jobs. That is the best way to go.

  • OJ

    The inside man over at PSD says:

    This one’s done… Two plus one… Jackson close behind… Shark being floated- heard the Padres as a team all over him, Indians as well…

    Very, very interesting.

  • nkniacc13

    If they trade Shark they better get a bunch of prospects for him maybenot top end like they get for garza but better than a couple of lottery tickets

  • http://www.opportunity.org Seamhead

    I believe the Cubs view Samardzija as the kind of guy who can lead a rotation, both by skill and personality. I seriously doubt they have plans to deal him.

    • DocPeterWimsey

      Wow, I didn’t realize that Samardzija ranked 14th in xFIP last summer, basically equalling Gio Gonzalez. (Verlander was 13th, with Dickey 12th!) Huh, he might might be better than I really had appreciated! (He did rack up a lot of points in our sabremetric-based fantasy league, so maybe I should have done so.)

  • Diamond Don

    Hold on to your seats. If Cubs sign both Villanueva and Jackson a major trade will follow!

    • nkniacc13

      I don’t know if a major trade but id be surprised if a trade didn’t

  • SalukiHawk

    Hypothetically: If we could get Olt, Perez and Buckel/Font/Odor for Shark, would you do it??
    Me… 10 times out of 10

    • Diamond Don

      Slam dunk yes!!!!

    • Kevin B

      Yes Saluki I would agree to do that. Do not see the Rangers making that kind of offer. But that kind of OVERPAY to the Cubs is something our FO would do and that is what it would take.

    • JBarnes

      SIUC?

      • Brad

        I went to SIUC and SIUE!!

  • nkniacc13

    well yeah but I think Shark may get you only 1 of those that you listed not 3

    • Jeremy

      Shark gets you all 3 easy…

    • SalukiHawk

      If the Mets can get D’arnaud and Syndergaard for freaking RA Dickey, I think Shark could easily bring 3 top prospects from an organization

      • Carew

        RA Dickey was also a Cy Young winner just last year. He may be 38, but knuckleballers can go a long time (ex. Wakefield)

        • nkniacc13

          Plus Dickey signed a 2 year extension and D’arnaud has some questions in some scouts eyes

  • Kevin

    Shark and Lake + a mid level guy or two for Olt

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      You’re overvaluing Olt something fierce. He’s not worth anywhere near that much. Samardzija alone should return a package featuring Olt.

      • daveyrosello

        This.

      • Kevin

        The thing about samardzijia is he only had one good yr as a starter and before that was an ok RP. I know he has alot of value but no team will sell the farm for him. As far as lake I think the cubs would love to throw him in a deal to free up a spot on the 40 man.

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          There are many less valuable assets on the 40 man that should be chucked well before Lake. Campana sits near the top of that list.

          If Lake can ever put it together, he’s easily a major league regular. And he is still quite young. If the Cubs can sell high on him they should, but I can’t see them dumping him for roster flexibility.

          • nkniacc13

            Luke, barring a trade who do you see as most likely roster casulties with the 2 spots needing opening. Do you think they will both be pitchers?

          • Kevin

            Yes but campana doesnt have trade value he will most likely get DFA. I think Lake has value but I would think now is the time to move him. I can see him being packaged or traded for some low level prospects with some upside

            • nkniacc13

              With all the talk of Shark trading thoughts, could the cubs be a 3rd team in a Upton to Texas trade

        • jt

          Shark pitched 87.3 innings before July 1 and 87.3 innings after July1.
          His ERA for the period before the above date was 5.05 and for the period after it was 2.58.
          It is hard to tell why his month of June was so bad. But if it was that he was learning his craft and trying stuff… well…; then perhaps the 2nd half indicates that we should watch closely to see just what it is that The Cubs have?

          • cas-castro

            i believe Shark was experimenting with a curve ball to compliment his slider and split. he ditched it after 3 or 4 starts and had better results

          • MichCubFan

            His walk rates were way up, so that says a lot.

    • http://Cubkid jdblades7

      You have Olt up on a pedastool, Shark proved himself as a dominant SP last year.Texas would have traded for Garza straight up for Olt before he got hurt last year and Shark has equal value right now as Garza did before the injury.

      • Vince

        What’s a pedastool? Sounds creepy

        • http://Cubkid jdblades7

          You never heard ” Your putting the pussy up on a pedestool” Yeah, maybe a little creepy, my bad

        • Internet Random

          It’s just a child’s bowel movement. A little gross, maybe, but nothing creepy.

          • TWC

            Larf.

        • Vince

          Haha

      • Kevin

        Disagree with shark had equal value to garza before his inj. Garza was a pretty good SP in AL East. Shark had one good season in NL. Garza has been solid for yrs and still relatively young.

        • http://Cubkid jdblades7

          He had an impressive second half with a mid two hundred ERA 11 K/9 and is younger. Yeah, one year as a starter but he showed alot with more potential when he is 29 compared to Garza in my opinion.

      • DocPeterWimsey

        A 0.282/0.391/0.521 line in the minors does that!

    • Kevin B

      Kevin are you crazy? You want to trade shark AND Lake and another prospect for Olt? Let me tell you something. Rangers would trade Olt for Shark alone and that would be highway robbery against the Cubs.

      Shark and Lake + a mid level guy or two for Olt.

      SalukiHawk – I disagree on your R.A. Dickey point. As someone pointed out of course he is the current CY YOUNG winner. Also Toronto would not even give that same package to the Cubs for Shark. They want to win now. Picking up a CY YOUN pitcher (38 yrs old means nothing for a knuckleballer) with a 3 year commitment for 30 million around and an option for the Jays for another year is a great deal for the Jays who want to win now and the next few years. Shark does not bring that to the Jays. Shark has only proven that he MAY one day be a top of the rotation guy, the Jays do not want that now, they want the real deal.

  • http://bleachernation frank hutch

    We have a better chance of winning a world series next year then any of those trades happening

  • http://www.opportunity.org Seamhead

    The Cubs need both Jackson and Villanueva because Garza insists on a no trade clause as part of any extension. That’s why the team will deal him during ST or before July 31.

  • http://bleachernation.com Ramy16

    Where in the hell are these rumors of Jeff Samardzija being traded?? Somebody pulled something out of their ass!

    • OJ

      They are “floating” him, per insider at Pro Sports Daily. He’s a credible source. Now, him being floated doesn’t mean he’s going to be traded. He most likely won’t be but the Cubs are interested in hearing what they can get for him.

      • Vince

        Is there a link for this?

        • OJ

          Yep. Username – ABTY7

          http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/showthread.php?t=789403&page=6

          He has connections within the organization and has called trades/targets weeks in advance of the media even coming close to reporting it.

        • OJ

          Bleachernation won’t let me leave a link. Google Pro Sports Daily Chicago Cubs and go to page 6 of the Carlos Villanueva thread.

          His username is – ABTY7

          He has connections within the organization and has reported trades/trades in the works weeks in advance of the media reporting anything like it.

          • Vince

            Thanks.

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

            There’s no block on links. Folks post links all the time. Sometimes the spam filter is overly aggressive. Just fixed that one.

          • EvenBetterNewsV2.0

            Yeah, and they have “floated” every single player on our roster at one given time or another. I will guarantee that. He always throws little tidbits out there like that to show he is an insider. However, I can’t recall one time one of those little, you never thought of that trades happened. You would think of the trades that actually do happen he would be able to see those coming, and I can’t recall a time he called a trade before it happened.

  • fastball

    Have been saying all along we need to stock pile pitching. None of these guys are top tier hut we can round out a nice bullpen. If we sign Jackson Villanueva and Howell we will be improved drastically. I keep them all. Texas wont trade for Shark. They cant give up Opt now as they are going younger now for 2013. If we go out and sign Bournemouth we might as well sign Ross as well. We would be good enough to win the central. The reds are do for an injury plagued season and the Cards wont be that good this year. They don’t have the Astros to beat up on anymore so that’s like 12 or 13 less wins for them.

  • nkniacc13

    if this deal is 2 /8.5 million with a 6 mill mutual option then i think its a great signing for cubs

  • BluBlud

    Wow. There is no way Campana gets waived. As it stands now, he is easily a starter on this current roster. There is no way Sherholtz or howeber you spell it, starts over him.

    Rusin, Raley, Rosario, Cabrera, Dolis, Valbeuna are all less valuable then Campana.

    • dudeski

      i’d say it’s entirely possible that schierholtz starts over campana considering campana is horrible at almost everything

      • MichiganGoat

        He will absolutely get more starts than Campana, all you Campana Scrappy Lovers get prepared for him not making the 25 man roster.

    • bbmoney

      Campana will be the starter…….in Iowa…..unless waived or traded.

      • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

        I don’t think he’ll start in Iowa either. Brett Jackson, Jae Hoon-Ha, and Greg Rohan are all easily ahead of him. And don’t forget Bogusevic. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Vitters and Lake both get some time out there as well.

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          Sigh. Misplaced the hyphen. Jae-Hoon Ha. Edit button, how I miss thee…

          • bbmoney

            It’s ok, you got me. I’ll defer to you on that one.

        • nkniacc13

          I wonder if they don’t trade Vitters this offseason if Lake and him don’t split time at 3rd and the OF in iowa for a while next year

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

            Lake will probably see a lot of innings at short this year too.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      A career OBP of .306 is not a starting outfielder.

    • RickyP024

      Dude Campana couldn’t stick in the lineup LAST year, what makes you think he will this year?

      • Blublud

        HCampana played pretty well as a starter until he was unfairly replace by Joe Mather. His speed is best in the league, and he has room to improve. If the y just let him play, he’ll be alright.

        • DocPeterWimsey

          Campana did not play “pretty well” as a starter: he was flat out bad.

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

            Checking his splits, he did get off to a fast start in fairly limited at bats. Then his numbers regressed back to, well, to Tony Campana.

            Not that Mather was much better. Fortunately the Cubs have better options this season.

            • DocPeterWimsey

              Even his “fast start” was an artifact of bouncers getting through and the official scorerers giving him sacrifices instead of outs when he bunted into outs with men on base.

              I would add that Campana did seem like a pretty good bunter, but there was zero element of surprise on his attempts. It does not matter how fast you are, if they know you probably will bunt and if your version of a line drive can be easily caught 30′ away, then they will get you out a lot no matter how fast you are.

          • MichiganGoat

            Weak defense, horrible arm, pathetic OBP, hideous bunter=BAD PLAYER. Being fast doesn’t get you on base, nor automatically mean you are good at defense. I swear scrappy love is a powerful drug, it makes fans ignore simple stats.

            Everyone repeat after me:
            CAMPANA IS NOT A STARTER,
            CAMPANA BARELY DESERVES A 25 MAN SPOT,
            SCRAPPY IS NOT A REAL STAT.

            Repeat

            • bbmoney

              Take that back. Scrappy not a stat? Absurd.

              • MichiganGoat

                Embrace the truth- SCRAPPY IS SCOOBY-DOO’s NEPHEW NOT A STAT

            • Vince

              Maybe not scrappy but definitely crappy.

              • Earl Cunningham

                Guys, quit putting Campana on a “pedastool.”

                • DocPeterWimsey

                  Yeah, you need a bigger stool than that to get Campana to eye level. Too bad his cousins didn’t share any Ent Draught with him….

                  • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

                    Applause

        • Kevin B

          Campana played well? Huh?? Unfairly replaced? Huh?

          The best way to use Campana’s speed is as a pinch runner. That is the only way he gets on base. He did have OBP of .320 this winter but so what? Does that translate over? I do not think so.

          162 games, he can pinch run once per game, that is where his value is, late innings steal the base! Heck he may have 40-50 by the all star break and some contender maybe could use that. But Campana as a starter? Not even on a bad team.

      • Blublud

        Campana played pretty well as a starter until he was unfairly replace by Joe Mather. His speed is best in the league, and he has room to improve. If the y just let him play, he’ll be alright.

        • dudeski

          campana is 26 years old and has never shown that he has the ability to A. hit B. walk C. bunt D. throw a baseball with more force than juan pierre

        • Drew7

          No, no he won’t. Campana is terrible.

        • Voice of reason

          Campana Played pretty well as a starter?

          The cubs lost 100 games last year and didn’t want to start him everyday. There are no teams knocking down the cubs door to trade for him.

          Now, do you REALLY think he played well as a starter last year??

  • fastball

    There are still 5 or 6 guys who we can dfa on the 40 man that nobody is going to claim. Our junk is not another mans treasure. Its just low talent low floor low ceiling chumps we don’t lose any sleep over. I have zero ounces of give crape about those guys. Campana Clevinger Sczurzur Camp without even looking at the list. I cant stand Camp he had his career year throwing 80 mph fastballs. He wont make it out of ST is my prediction.

    • jt

      Camp had been much better in 2010 and just a hair better in 2009.
      Seems they are trying to add somebody better in order to make him their 5th best RP’er.
      I’m cool with that.

    • http://Cubkid jdblades7

      Somebody would definitely take a chance on Sczurzur and Clevenger still could be a decent left handed backup catcher on a few teams. Sczurzur was a top 100 prospect last year and had almost a 400 OBP this year with speed and potential to be a decent center fielder.Yeah, he needs some more pop, but if that area improves he could shine

  • fastball

    Campana only does one thing and that’s steal a base. No arm no bat no threat andy not that great in cf.

  • http://bleachernation.com frank hutch

    Campana has trade value? Shark is a dominant starter? What were you watching last year? I didnt see any of that

  • http://bleachernation.com frank hutch

    Campana doesnt have value in the japaneese league let alone mlb. He blows. Might as well bring back augie ojeita

  • gutshot5820

    For the right package, I would trade Samardzia in a heartbeat. If the strategy is to sign good free agent pitchers and trade Sam while hie value is sky high and fill a couple of needs, then definitely do it. He is just an asset right now.

  • Rich H

    If we could get a serious hall back for Shark I would be all for listening. But because of how pitching has dried up I would have to be seriously blown away.

    As far as Can’t Hit Campana he needs to figure it out now or he should be gone. I think we could drop him from the 40 man pretty easy and still keep him. He right now is a 5th OF in Triple A.

  • Cory

    Noway they are trading Shark teams would sell the farm for a guy of with his stuff. He has #1 potential most of his issues were from his heavy workload follow this link. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/how-good-is-jeff-samardzijas-splitter/

  • newoutlook

    The FO should try this. Offer Sori a buyout of 25mil and his release. Sori then would
    have the 25mil and an opportunity to play for who ever he wants or just retire. Don’t think there would be any problem with the league as long as sori agrees to the buyout.

    • bbmoney

      Why would we do that? Soriano was really good last year. It’s not like he was Vernon Wells or Chone Figgins.

      I’m also not sure why Soriano would do that since that $36M is guaranteed. He could just say…..waive me and get all $36M.

      • Kevin B

        BB money well said. Why would the Cubs pay $25 million to Soriano to NOT play (they could bench him I guess if they had someone better to hit 30 homers and knock in 100 and make no errors) and not even get any prospect back for him?

        Not sure what New Outlook was smoking? And of course like you said, why would Soriano take it when he can get the full 36 million? Sori is just going to say ok, I let you off $13 million and retire?

        • gutshot5820

          You lost all credibility with that post.

  • Muck

    Oh my gosh Bowden just tweeted Cubs are front runners for Jackson so that means this deal is going to shit

    • Vince

      No! The kiss of death courtesy of James Bowman

      • Muck

        We are most likely screwed now

  • cubsin

    Everyone here wants the Cubs to add more pitching. Some, however, can’t wait to trade Garza and Samardjiza. I don’t believe those two goals are logically consistent.

    • The Dude

      I think they’re consistent in that; the Cubs have money but have many needs. The current market dictates that one of their most valuable assets is a young, cost-controlled pitcher. Spend the money in FA to acquire more pitching while trading away Shark to supplement a growing nucleus.

      If a trade happens, I think that’s the FO read on the market, and I would support that position – only because he’s not a true “ace.”

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+