Quantcast

stoveAs the operator of this site, I’m sensitive to the twin interests of getting you my thoughts on every bit of salient Cubs-related info out there in a timely fashion, while simultaneously not inundating you with so much that it all becomes noise and you grow irritated. Never is that risk more prevalent than during trade rumor season (and free agency). To that end, I’m cognizant of the fact that there have been a ton of rumors and Lukewarm Stoves the last 10 days or so, and I was starting to wonder if it was just me, or if the market was going rumor crazy very early this year. It sounds like Dodgers GM Ned Colletti answered for me in a comment to Jim Bowden: “There have been far more serious trade discussions five weeks away from July 31st deadline than I can ever recall.”

So, it isn’t just me, and that’s why you’re getting a Lukewarm Stove in the middle of a Cubs game …

  • As I mentioned yesterday, the Marlins and Ricky Nolasco might end up kicking off the trade market, and if a report from ESPN is accurate, it could happen very, very soon. (Jon Heyman confirms that the talks are happening.) A source tells ESPN that the Dodgers and Marlins are already “deep into trade talks” about Nolasco. The Dodgers are a possible destination for the Cubs’ available arms and this would probably close the Dodgers off as a trading partner, but Nolasco going to the NL West is a good thing. Every team is in the race, and the Dodgers moving early could compel each of the other teams to aggressively pursue an upgrade (creating a ripple effect, putting the Cubs in the catbird seat).
  • One of the big arms the Cubs have to follow up a Nolasco deal is Matt Garza, who is pitching today in front of a huge number of scouts. Carrie Muskat says the Nationals, Dodgers, Orioles, Blue Jays and Phillies are all represented in Milwaukee, though it probably isn’t a lock that the scouts are there to see only Matt Garza.
  • George Ofman says that the Rangers are very interested in Garza (recall, they were heavily in on him last year before his elbow owwie), and could make a move as soon as this weekend. To that end, Garza’s start (and health) today could be even more important. I sense an “Obsessive Matt Garza Trade Watch” in the offing, and it makes me a little sad.
  • In a writeup on the state of the Braves’ bullpen (injured), Braves beat writer Mark Bowman suggests that the Braves will have interest in Cubs closer Kevin Gregg, should he be shopped. No real surprise there – I’d be shocked if there was a competitive team in baseball with bullpen needs that would not have at least some interest in Gregg. He’s cheap, he’s a perfect rental, and he’s performing exceptionally well. The Cubs aren’t going to get a ton for Gregg, but there will be interested teams.
  • In a bummer for baseball/the Orioles, top pitching prospect Dylan Bundy, who’s been out with arm issues this year, is having Tommy John surgery. This is of significance on the trade market not only because it removes Bundy as a trade chip (he was never going to be traded anyway (and if he was, it’s not like the Cubs are afraid to take on a Tommy John pitcher)), but because it could impact the Orioles’ plans. They now cannot hope for Bundy to be ready in the second half, and this could push them even further into the we-desperately-need-a-pitcher mode. Then again, as BN’er North Side Irish pointed out in the comments, it could make the Orioles more inclined to pursue a pitcher with at least another year of control left, since they’ll be sans Bundy in 2014. The only tradable Cub who fits that bill is Carlos Villanueva, a name were aren’t hearing too much in rumors.
  • Mark Teixeira is done for the year because his ongoing wrist problems will require surgery. Without Teix, Kevin Youkilis, Curtis Granderson, or ARod for an extended period of time, you’ve got to believe the Yankees are desperately searching for some thump on the trade market. Alfonso Soriano? Nate Schierholtz? Too bad Ian Stewart didn’t work out, otherwise he’d be a really nice trade chip to have right now. Of course, if he had worked out, we’d probably want to see him stick around, and we wouldn’t have seen the emergence of Luis Valbuena.
  • Tim Dierkes chatted at MLBTR, and there were a number of Cubs bits … (1) the Garza/Padres rumor makes a lot of sense given the fit, but Reymond Fuentes doesn’t make sense as the center piece of a deal – the Cubs would aim higher; (2) extremely difficult to see the Cubs getting anything at all for Carlos Marmol; (3) Dierkes sees the Nationals going after a big arm like Garza (or others in that same class); (3) Scott Feldman’s trade value isn’t quite as high as Paul Maholm’s was last year (extra year of control, longer successful track record), but if the Cubs sweeten the pot with a Ryan Sweeney type, they might be able to get an Arodys Vizcaino-like return (to which I’d note that the Cubs did sweeten the pot last year with Reed Johnson, a reserve outfield rental like Sweeney would be, though Sweeney might offer just a touch more value than Johnson); (4) the Cubs would probably have a lot of interest in buying low on Will Middlebrooks from the Red Sox if there was a matchup on a deal; and (5) Dierkes isn’t sure the Cubs could land a top 100 prospect for Nate Schierholtz, but definitely an “interesting” piece (you’ll call me crazy, but given the 2014 outfield configuration and the cheap year of control left, I’m not sure I’d want the Cubs dealing Schierholtz for less than that – he offers a lot of value to the 2014 Cubs; not that I’m saying he *could* net a top 100 prospect).
  • cubsin

    Back up the truck, and let the bidding begin.

  • JulioZuleta

    I get the feeling we’ll see a few more “dugout hugs” in the coming weeks.

  • http://Bleachernation Lou Brock

    My guy with Dodger ears says Garza not their target but they like Valbuena and James Russell for bullpen. They are not happy with Uribe at third and are looking for a left handed bat like Valbuena.

  • Oswego chris

    The Cubs can’t trade all of these guys, and in some of these deals we need to get guys who can play next year…we have enough talent in low A..etc….Middlebrooks could be intriguing…

    Man I would love to keep Garza…when healthy he is good…

    • Good Captain

      Probably shouldn’t, but if we did, I think we’d be in the running for the 2nd or 3rd Pick in the 2014 Draft.

    • frank

      I agree–I’d love to keep Garza as well.

  • Jono

    Your articles never get annoying, brett. Keep them coming!

  • Rebuilding

    All nice points, Brett. I really hope we stay away from Middlebrooks. He just strikes out way too much. Once around the league and they figured out you don’t have to throw him a strike.

    Given the way the races are shaping up we picked a good year to be sellers. If the Marlins get Pederson or Lee as part of a Ricky Nolasco deal I will be really disappointed, but it sounds like something Coletti would do

  • Kevin F.

    Here’s hoping that this is the last year of a “Flip This Player” mini-series. If they collect players to put on their baseball equivalent of eBay in ’14, they’re going to test the patience of a lot of fans. One or two pieces? Sure. Five or six spots? No.

    • Rebuilding

      I think they will deal anyone on this team outside of Rizzo and Samardzija. And I think we have one more year of it. I just don’t see anyway we are competitive with the Cardinals, Reds or even the Pirates next year

      • TonyP

        Agreed…………. :-(

      • Rich H

        I think next year we will “Compete” ie compete for .500 and our climb for the wild card begins in 2015. But lightning in a bottle could have that happening next year but that is not the plan. Expect this teams ” Jason Werth” deal this offseason and everyone wondering what the hell is going on like they did when the Nat’s over bid themselves for Werth.

      • Kevin F.

        I don’t expect a competitive team before 2016 myself. But watching games that feature an expansionist outfield and seeing the most effective players get launched in July is wearing. Three consecutive seasons of same would be pretty taxing, although I agree it’s likely to happen and accept that it’s probably necessary in the rebuilding process. (It’d help if Rizzo and Castro were doing anything notable.)

        • Jay

          I doubt that we could get anything close to useful for Schierholz and he’s doing a really good job for us and we need cheap OF’s for next year. I’d like to see us keep him. Trading someone just for the sake of getting bodies for the farm doesn’t make sense if you don’t see real value in what you’re getting. He probably offers us far more value then anything we could get for him.

          • BluBlud

            I disagree. I think Schierholtz may be the best OF on the market so far. You tell me where a team can find .293/.342/.563/.905 and 11 HR in this market, not to mention that is that cheap, with another year of control. I would love to keep the guy, but he is clearly worth at least a top 100 player to somebody.

  • gcheezpuff

    I know Will Middlebrooks is struggling and has been demoted back to AAA, but i still think that could be an awesome buy low for the Cubs.

    • Rebuilding

      Even going back to A ball he has always struck out more than 25% of the time. He just doesn’t have pitch recognition skills. Just my opinion but I think buying low on him is really just buying what he is. If the Red Sox feel inclined to give him away than ok, but I wouldn’t give up anything substantial

      • Ash

        So you’re saying he’ll fit right in here?

    • Justin

      I would trade Garza in a heartbeat for Middlebrooks. He strikes out a ton, but still has upside for sure. He was pretty freaking awesome for a 23 yr old rookie last yr.

  • Jolt

    I hate to be “That Guy” but I’ve seen you do this a lot and it’s bothered me for a long time and I now have to say something about it….

    When you want to put parenthesis within parenthesis, you need to use square brackets, not more parenthesis (kind of like this [know what I mean?]).

    And now back to the rumors…

    • Jolt

      He said as he typo’d parenthesis (and used the reply system inappropriately [whoops])

      • Jolt

        ……. parentheses

    • Crockett

      Haha. Lawyer Brett should probably know better too…

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      It’s a style choice, and one that I stand by, That Guy.

      • JulioZuleta

        I’m a (( )) guy as well. I find that people that use ([ ]) tend to be psychopathic.

        • Ash

          Or a Cardinal fan. Wait… is that redundant?

        • cubzfan

          Besides, we all know it’s really [()]. Or, if you must, {[()]}.

          • Cub Fan Dan

            (.Y.) < Uh huh huh huh!

      • Bric

        Damn it, Brett. I wanted to be the first to call him “that guy”. You beat me to the punch line!
        Sidebar to Jolt- I think you should dump “Jolt” and go with “That guy”. Once you get named on here you gotta go with it.

    • Serious Cubs Fan

      Mrs. Shingleton is that you? My 5th grade english teacher? parentheses…..really? Grammar stickler. but oh well, we all got are pet peeves

      • DarthHater

        Mine is the difference between “our” and “are.”

        • waittilthisyear

          mine is the difference between “their” and “they’re” and “cucumber”

          • Coop

            How about than and then

        • JulioZuleta

          My recent grammar pet peeves are 1. the misspelling of the word “definitely” (seriously, when did this become hard to spell), it’s not ‘defiantly’ or ‘definately’ and 2. overuse of the word “literally”

          • Cyranojoe
          • Drew7

            ” 2. overuse of the word “literally”

            Agreed. I also hate when people use, “irregardless”.

            • frank

              I went to a Catholic college and had a professor who used to watch The Phil Donahue show. One day, she wrote to Mr. Donahue and said, “I can forgive you for having prostitutes and murderers and thieves on your show, but I cannot forgive “irregardless” especially from a Notre Dame graduate.”

    • frank

      As a former college English professor, I can tell you that this is a style choice and not a hard and fast rule.

      • Cyranojoe

        As a guy with a lit degree and a journo degree, I agree. But I like the brackets. Clarity is a good thing, as fun as parenthesis-within-parenthesis can be…

  • BD

    “The catbird seat” is one of my favorite phrases.

    • http://none millhah

      reminds me of the La Crosse Catbirds…those were the good ol’ days!

    • Cyranojoe

      Brett, I believe you meant “the catbird’s pajama seat”. Yes?

      • frank

        Then are the catbird’s pajamas necessarily greater than the cat’s pajamas if the catbird is sitting in the catbird seat?

  • Jono

    Its strange how my feeling for the team changes throughout the year. In the fall last year, fresh off 101 losses, I just wanted the best team possible. Now, fresh off the draft and going into the trade season, I want to see as much minor league talent acquired as possible at the direct sacrifice of the big league team, a complete 180. Obviously my patience doesn’t last 162 games

  • Jolt

    He said as he typo’d parentheses

  • Ash

    It’s funny you mention Middlebrooks. That’s the first thing I thought of when he was sent down. How low is his value though? Kevin Gregg straight up low? From the Red Sox perspective, they see Iglesias as the SS of the future, not their 3B. So maybe they’re in no hurry to move Middlebrooks?

    • Rebuilding

      Boegarts is their SS of the future and Cecchini is their 3b of the future. Iglesias appears to be their utility guy of the future

  • Chris84

    Post all you want and I’ll keep reading. This is the only site that stays open all day in my web browser.

  • Crockett

    It’s getting to that point in the year that I am hitting refresh…a lot. My poor phone’s 4G struggles to keep up with me.

  • Serious Cubs Fan

    haha I love how JD and Len talk about Garza trade value. Garza’s teamates, coaches, and broadcasters and everyone expects him to be traded soon

  • http://Bleachernation Lou Brock

    The Bosox have Cechinni as their # 1 prospect slated to play third within a year or two at most.

  • JulioZuleta

    I can’t watch the game right now but, does Matt Garza look as dominant on TV as he does in the box score?

  • Jon

    Garza should net us a top 25 prospect(+ some good supp pieces) in all of baseball and nothing less.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      I would not count on that.

      A top 100 and a couple more good pieces would be a solid return.

      • JB88

        My last joking comment aside, while I don’t agree with the OP’s idea of a Top 25 +, I do think that if the Cubs trade Garza after this start, someone is paying a premium for him and should net more than when the market is a bit more saturated. IOW, like Sabean said, someone’s overpaying [for Garza] if they make that trade now.

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

          Sure. I agree with this.

      • Mrcub1958

        Brett, what if we trade everything before the deadline? I’ve already set aside funds for your 48 energy marathon!

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

          I will be very sad, but there will be tons of activity that/those day/days that I can connect to the Cubs *somehow* if I have to.

          But I’m sure there’ll be a couple pieces left by then.

      • Serious Cubs Fan

        Brett,
        You don’t think Garza could land us a guy like Jameson Taillon caliber pitcher? What if we had another throw-in guy to the trade like Navarro or dejesus?

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

          No, I don’t think so. Pure rental, injury questions, no possible compensatory pick at the end of the year (once a guy is traded, that’s out the window). He’s awesome. Don’t get me wrong. But even Greinke couldn’t net a top 25 prospect last year as a rental.

          • JB88

            The difference between this year and last year, however, is the number of non-traditional teams in the race right now. Teams like the Pirates, Indians, KC, Toronto, with traditional powers like LA (both) and Washington currently on the outside looking in, you should be able to create a sellers market quickly due to supply and demand.

        • Rebuilding

          Garza is a good to very good pitcher. That said a team is only getting half a year of him. Expecting a Top 10 prospect for a guy that is not an ace just isn’t realistic. On most playoff teams Garza is probably a #3 starter. Given this year’s market we might get lucky and get someone in the 25-75 range but anything more would be an absolute homerun

          • SenorGato

            You say #3 on a playoff team like its a bad thing. Hes been a #2 on a WS team before.

            • Rebuilding

              Not a bad thing at all. Pitching games 3 and 6 in a playoff series are obviously important. I just said he wasn’t an ace. Are you expecting a Top 25 prospect for half of a year of Garza?

          • Kyle

            List six teams that are currently in position to make the playoffs that have two starters better than Garza….go.

            • RizzoCastro

              Tigers, Cards, Reds, Braves, Nationals, Dbacks. But I think they all could use Garza as an up grade on there #2 or #3. IMO

              • frank

                If Garza is an upgrade on their 2, then they don’t have a second pitcher better than Garza.

            • Rebuilding

              In all of these rotations Garza would at best be #3 and it’s not particularly close:

              Washington – Strasburg, Gonzalez and Zimmerman
              St. Louis – Wainwright and Miller and probably Lynn
              Cincinnati – Cueto and Latos
              LA – Kershaw and Grienke
              SF – Cain and Bumgarner
              Texas – Darvish and Holland
              Det – Verlander and Scherzer and maybe Fister and Sanchez

              In these rotations it would be close whether he was #2 or #3:

              Atlanta – Hudson, Minor and Medlen
              Pittsburgh – Burnett and Liriano
              Toronto – Dickey and J. Johnson
              NYY – Sabathia and Kuroda
              Boston – Buchholz and Lester

              Try again. I like Garza but let’s get realistic

              • Kyle

                You listed four playoff teams under your “definite.”

                • Rebuilding

                  ? You said teams in position to make the playoffs. Which of those teams is not in position to make the playoffs?

                  • Rebuilding

                    Has someone clinched a spot, yet?

                  • Kyle

                    “in a position” as in currently either leading their division or in one of the two wild card positions.

                    • Rebuilding

                      Why is that important? Those aren’t the only teams that are going for it. Why would you exclude the Dodgers, Padres, Giants, Nationals, Pirates/Reds, Orioles, Yankees, Indians and Angels. Whether rightly or wrongly those teams are trying to make the playoffs.

                    • RizzoCastro

                      I think Kyle’s point is well taken. Garza is an upgrade on most any team for a solid number 2.

                    • Rebuilding

                      Of the 15 or so teams trying to make the playoffs I think that’s probably not true for all but 2 of them

                    • RizzoCastro

                      Tigers, Cards, Nats, Reds, and maybe the Giants have a better number 2. Other than those I think Garza would be better than most on the list you gave above. He was on a WS team as a number 2 starter. He has experience and when healthy is a quality number 2. When we got Garza many people thought of him as close to a number 1. I think A solid number 2 on a playoff team is correct.

                    • Coop

                      Rebuilding-

                      In all of these rotations Garza would at best be #3 and it’s not particularly close:

                      Washington – Strasburg, Gonzalez and Zimmerman
                      St. Louis – Wainwright and Miller and probably Lynn
                      Cincinnati – Cueto and Latos
                      LA – Kershaw and Grienke
                      SF – Cain and Bumgarner
                      Texas – Darvish and Holland
                      Det – Verlander and Scherzer and maybe Fister and Sanchez

                      In these rotations it would be close whether he was #2 or #3:

                      Atlanta – Hudson, Minor and Medlen
                      Pittsburgh – Burnett and Liriano
                      Toronto – Dickey and J. Johnson
                      NYY – Sabathia and Kuroda
                      Boston – Buchholz and Lester

                      Try again. I like Garza but let’s get realistic
                      __________________________________

                      I would take Garza (when healthy) over all the pitchers you listed in the “close whether he was #2 or #3″ except Sabathia and maybe Lester.

                      I also think, when you start talking the pressure of the playoffs or a very tight end-of-season race, I might favor a healthy Garza over some of the guys you listed as “at best be #3 and it’s not particularly close.”

                    • Rebuilding

                      Ok, I’ll just look at the teams who would qualify for the postseason today. To me Garza is a #2 on a decent pitching staff and #3 on a good one. So on which teams would he definitely start Game 2 of the WS?

                      Boston – Buchholz and Lester – no
                      Baltimore – Hammel and Gonzalez – yes
                      Detroit – Verlander and Scherzer – no
                      Texas – Darvish and Holland – no
                      Oakland – Colon and Parker? – yes

                      Atlanta – Hudson and Minor – maybe, but doubt it
                      St. Louis – Wainwright and Miller – no
                      Pittsburgh – Burnett and Liriano – doubt it
                      Cincinnati – Cueto and Latos – no
                      Arizona – Miley and Cahill – maybe

                      And the teams right behind these teams in some cases have even better top 2s – Washington, SF, LA

                      Look. I like Garza, but he is a 2/3 tweeter to me. People talking about getting Profar or Taillon or any other Top 25 prospect need to temper their expectations a little

                    • Kyle

                      Because the original assertion was about a majority of the playoff teams having two better starters than Garza, so I wanted to see if 6 out of 10 really did. We don’t know which 10 those teams will be, so that seemed like a logical way to decide it.

          • Cheryl

            Wouldn’t a team that’s paying high for Garza want to work out an extension?
            They’ll want him beyond this season if they pay a high price for him.

      • Jon

        According to a respected poster ABTY on PSD, many view Garza as the best option on the market including Price(give Price’s prohibitive cost), so IMO, getting a prospect ranked around 50ish, 60ish, (+ throw ins)would be pretty awful.

        • Jon

          I should add, not only is Garza the best option this deadline, he might be the best option available the next “couple of years”

          • Rebuilding

            I think that might very well be true. But he is also about to get very expensive

          • Jon

            btw does anyone know where Jean Segura was ranked at the time of the Grienke trade?

        • JB88

          What thread was that in?

      • frank

        Again, I’d like to see the Cubs keep Garza. But suppose Nolasco goes to the Dodgers and the Dodgers overpay–I know it’s hard to say without seeing an actual trade, but wouldn’t that push the price up?

      • praying the cubs get ready to win

        If that is all we would get, I would work on resigning him.

        I think Hedges has to be part of a deal for Garza.

    • JB88

      Die Hard? Is that you?

  • stevie

    I think this trade season, with our bigger trade pieces, I see Theo and Hoyer targeting guys that are ready, or near ready for the majors. Garza for example may net us 2 young guys that may be already in the majors, or at AAA close to ready to make the jump to the majors, plus a lower level prospect. I have to think they are focused on adding to the major league roster at this point. We will be spending money this offseason, but we can’t fill out a whole team with free agents. I gotta believe that the kids we add will get every chance to show they would contribute next year, along with Rizzo, Castro, and some others on the pitching staff. this way the FO will have a much better idea of what we will need this offseason and narrow down the spending plan to specific needs.

    Garza, Gregg, Feldman, Schierholz, DeJesus, and Russell should net us at least 4-5 younger guys that can play the remainder of this year to show what they will add to next year’s team. Valbuena I don’t see being traded unless we get a pretty good option at 3rd thru the other trades. Barney will be a throw in type piece as well. Villanueva could be moved for something decent as well, but I think it’s more likely he’ll be in the rotation sometime during the next couple weeks. He’ll be able to help stabilize the starting rotation with Shark, and hopefully Baker, as well as a prospect or 2 we get in trades.

  • Brian

    2 of Luke Jackson, Neil Murphy, and CJ Edwards would be a nice start for a Garza trade…

    • Brian

      From Texas that is, sorry.

      • Brian

        And meant Neil Ramirez. Total fail on my part. Apologies.

  • Jason

    If the Cubs make any trade with the Padres. They better start with Padres catching prospect Austin Hedges.

    • praying the cubs get ready to win

      Agree

  • Justin

    Just thinking out loud, but I wonder if Segura’s success is going to hurt Garza’s trade value? A couple months of Greinke for Segura has to be one of the worst trades in recent memory.

    • Dumpgobbler

      Sure wont. EVERY year a team trades too much for a rental. Before that it was Wheeler for Beltran.

  • fred clark

    We need to keep valbuena maybe its time brining up the future players

  • North Side Irish

    Can’t afford an injury to Navarro right now…he’s key to maximizing Garza’s value.

  • Adam

    I want Nolasco to go first.

    Additionally, what players nets for prospects is not equal to what another player nets in prospects.

    Anyone who has ever done a fantasy baseball draft, knows that at the end of a tier for a position, the bids go up. People sit around and say oh, thats too much for this guy, until there is no one left and they overbid. Cubs need folks overbidding.

    Garza, Gregg, Feldman, Schierholtz, Soriano, Villanueva, Barney, Valbuena, trade um all.

    I’m not even opposed to trading Wood for a massive return.

  • Adam

    Also, I’m not worried about the 2014 Cubs. Lets trade off, get some possible pieces, and sign some more upside guys to cheap contracts and sell off again. I’m worried about 2015 and beyond. Hendry left the cupboard darn near bare (sans Cashner and Baez), and in order to build this thing up right, it takes 3 or 4 years of massive focus on the lower leagues. Signing all the players a la the Dodgers or Yankees just isn’t going to work in baseball’s new setup.

    • THEOlogical

      Your wrong Adam, you don’t just trade pieces that can contribute to the future, for more pieces. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the plan is to have a core of quality young talent and build around them. You start with signing short term FA’s and as many trash heap players as possible. And then flip them to stockpile your minor leagues. You do good in the drafting pool and once your core has been solidified, you bring in top FA’s and trade them away once your minor leagues start to produce young talent.
      To trade away players of the future for a further future is ludicrous. I believe they’ll try and have a competitive team next yr. It may not happen, but I don’t see the FO putting together a team built around tradeable assets and blowing this thing up again. You’ll never succeed by keeping a high turnover rate.

  • ramin

    Off topic, but nice to see Castro slowly getting out of his slump.

  • HackAttack

    I can’t get enough rumors Brett. So keep them coming.

    But Lukewarm Stove seems inappropriate at this time of year to talk about the rumor mill.

    How about a pepper mill? Coffee mill. Donna Mills?

  • Bric

    Two comments on all of these trade rumors.
    1: it’s a little bit strange Villanueva isn’t getting more interest from other teams. Any idea why?
    2: I’m no cool-aide drinker but Thedstein has done a really good job of bringing in cheap veterans, turning them around, and providing a chance to flip them for prospects. Sure, the Stewart trade and Jackson signing look like big mistakes, but overall, Maholm, Feldman, Villanueva, Gregg, Sweeney, etc. are way more than Hendry ever brought in for a 2 year span for a lot less money.

    • Pat

      To be fair, Hendry never has the advantage of being able to ignore results at the major league level for multiple seasons. Flipping guys is great and all, but it’s not a strategy that leads to much chance at post season success, especially not sustained success.

      • Adam

        Hendry was brought in to win at the Major League level, and pump up the value of Cubs so the Tribune Co could sell them.

        He was a much better buyer in trades than he was a seller. I don’t believe the Tribune company cared to focus much on the minor leagues, and Hendry served his purpose, getting the Cubs as close as they’ve come in a long time. What we see now are the remnants of going for it.

        The new FO was brought in to rebuild an entire franchise from the ground up.

        • Kyle

          That’s not true at all.

          Hendry was brought in to run the Cubs’ minor league scouting and development. He did such a fantastic job there that he was promoted to assistant GM and then GM.

          The “pump up the value for the sale” thing didn’t come along until several years into Hendry’s tenure.

          • #1lahairfan

            Exactly.

      • GoldenCub

        I agree about the “ignoring” results at the major league level, but I still appreciate having this front office vs the Hendry regime. Where I really see this is in the backup plans that are in place. Theo and Jed have had a LOT of bad luck/difficult situations (Garza hurt, Dempster and Soriano exercising rights that this FO did not give them, etc) arise that they still were able to work around and get decent value, while it seemed like with Hendry everyone knew the deal before it happened with the possible exception of the Nomar trade and maybe the Simon/Lofton deals. There never seemed to be any backup plans or ideas under Hendry, but maybe they just were not publicized as well.

        • Cedlandrum

          Just to be clear, Soriano wasn’t given a No trade. He was exercising his 10/5 rights. Pretty sure same with Dempster.

          • DarthHater

            I’m not certain, but I think Soriano does have a contractual no-trade clause, in addition to 10/5 rights. But Dempster did not have that.

    • Kyle

      Eh. If you only look at the successes, then it seems like it worked out great.

      We spent a few million on Stewart, a few million on Volstad, five million on Baker, a million on Camp this year, etc. etc.

      They’re doing all right, and way better this year than last year, but they’ve also been afforded the money and hopeless seasons to do this with, something virtually no other team can do.

      I imagine there’s a lot of front offices in baseball that could match the performance if they were given two years with absolutely no pressure to win and could load up on as much speculative stuff as they could find.

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+