Quantcast

jeff samardzija beardIf you’re a contender looking over the Chicago Cubs’ roster, there’s probably one player that jumps out at you above all others that you’d love to acquire: Jeff Samardzija. Not only has he pitched like a borderline ace over the last year and a half, but he’s got a young arm, is 28, and is under team control through 2015.

Of course you’d want Jeff Samardzija.

And so it is with the Arizona Diamondbacks, according to Ken Rosenthal’s sources. They tell him that the Diamondbacks aren’t interested in a two-month rental pitcher, and instead would want to acquire a longer term piece like Yovani Gallardo or Samardzija. Rosenthal says the Cubs and Diamondbacks have not spoken, but he was told that it would take an “overwhelming” package to land Samardzija. Folks around baseball know that the price would be so extreme that one source told Rosenthal that the Cubs haven’t even received any “hits” on Samardzija.

The price cannot be understated. The Chicago Cubs need Jeff Samardzija as much as – or more than – virtually every other team in baseball. The organization likely would prefer to be not terrible in 2014 if at all possible, and Samardzija is the best starting pitcher the Cubs have under contract for the next two years. There are no studly arms waiting in the wings to replace him, and his departure could wreck the rotation.

So, yes, the Cubs would have to be overwhelmed to consider moving Samardzija. That is not to say they wouldn’t consider it, as they would consider trading anyone. Moving Samardzija could be a franchise-changing move, adding multiple elite talents – from the Diamondbacks, you’d want the conversation to start with top tier pitching prospects like Archie Bradley and Tyler Skaggs, each of whom have the potential to be Samardzijas in their own right – all in one move. The Cubs could actually improve in 2014 (and beyond) by dealing Samardzija.

… if they hit on the prospects they acquire. That’s obviously the persistent risk with trading someone like Samardzija, who is young enough and under control enough to help the Cubs when they actually expect to be good. In that way, dealing Samardzija stands in stark contrast to trading an expiring contract for a player that might not be willing to re-sign at a reasonable rate (which, for example, is possibly the case with Matt Garza). It is a huge risk that the Cubs will consider, but that I have trouble seeing them pulling the trigger on.

It’s worth pointing out, though, that if the Cubs did decide to shop Samardzija, they wouldn’t be speaking only to the Diamondbacks. There would be something of a serious bidding war.

  • Internet Random

    I’d bet more heavily on your getting to be five inches taller.

    • Hansman1982

      He’d then be average height. Did you see the booster seat and pedal extenders in his Marmol DFA picture?

      • Boogens

        Conversations heard from the Taylor household:

        “Come on, Dad. Get off! It’s my turn to ride the tricyle!”

        • hansman1982

          Hey, honey, in a few more months, Junior can wear my hand-me-downs from last week!

          • Boogens

            Nice!!! I really am LOL-ing!

  • Chad

    I think it would take about the top 5 prospects in a good farm system to get Samardzija. Or more, I don’t really know.

  • Cedlandrum

    You would have to start with asking them for Skaggs or Bradley and then hit them hard two more times. I am not against trading Shark because by the time we are ready to compete he will be 30. I know he is a little different and doesn’t have the wear and tear on his arm but he will be in the back half of his career.

    • Cedlandrum

      Matt Davidson looks like a good young 3rd baseman.

    • Chad

      I think your or should be and. It starts with Skaggs and Bradley in my mind. You have to assume one (or both) might not pan out, and you have gotten Samardzija where you need him through development. You don’t know if either will be able to become Samardzija.

      • On The Farm

        Agree that it should be Skaggs and Bradley. You would have to think that they know the Cubs are going to want two arms for Shark. Their FO office isn’t stupid, they know an idea of how much it would cost them to land Shark, so the fact that they are talking about it is intriguing.

  • Gcheezpuff

    I don’t expect the Cubs to move either Shark or Wood, but if AZ is really interested in Shark (young, good, team control) you would have to wonder if they also would be interested in Wood, who is probably the more likely of the two to be moved. He also would take a pretty good haul of prospects, but the FO might believe he is pitching over his head right now and want to cash in at max value. I would prefer the Cubs to extend both though as I actually believe Wood is better then most originally thought and can sustain success as maybe a #3 LHSP.

  • Cubsfan31

    Regardless of Shark’s arm, by the time the Cubs are ready to compete, he will be towards the end of his career. I would love to see Theo/Jed trade him because we could see such a HUGE return.

    • bbmoney

      When are you expecting the Cubs to compete? 2018 or later? He’s only 28 and doesn’t really have that many miles on his arm for a 28 year old starter at that.

      • Abe Froman

        I’m expecting to compete in 2015. I hate saying this because I love Samardzija, but if they included Skaggs and Bradley with another respectable piece I would lean towards taking it. Along with the other prospects we get for Garza, Feldman, whoever else we sell this season, all added to a healthy farm system, and I think we are setup nicely for 2015 (pitching will be a priority in the trades). I would like to be a playoff team next year but I’m not seeing it.

        • bbmoney

          I’m with you Abe. Everyone has a price, and that’s a heck of a price.

          I more just don’t get the Shark will be at the end of his career comment. That implies much later than 2015. Of course that’s all we control him through, so if you don’t think you can keep him…..but that’s easier to think about 2014 and 2015 too far off now.

          • Jono

            Im one who thinks a 2015 contender is overly optimistic, but id love to be proven wrong. Most young teams don’t contend the first year or two they come together. Make it into the playoffs? Maybe, but when I write “contend”, I don’t mean contend for a playoff spot. Sure, anything CAN happen in the playoffs, but it’s not likely that a team like the royals or orioles win the world series

            • Jono

              And look at the nationals. Off the top if my head, I want to say that it took them like 4 years from their 60-something-win season to make it to contender mode, and that was after drafting Strasburg and harper.

              • Kyle

                And they’re struggling to stay at .500 this year.

                Two years is an eternity in baseball, so a ton can happen between now and then. Guys will almost randomly get better or worse in ways we can’t imagine.

                That said, if I’m just projecting out the division from here to 2015, I think we’re still the fourth-best team in the division by then. *Maybe* third.

                • Jono

                  Its still june

            • bbmoney

              I’m not necessarily overly optimistic for 2015 either, but I think that’s the start of a reasonable time-frame. It’s a long ways away, as currently constructed 2015 doesn’t look great, but soooooo much can happen between now and then. Shark would still only be 30, and I think it’s too early to look to trade him because of sign-ability concerns.

              That said, again, everyone has a price.

              • Jono

                Totally. I think 2015 is the year they start looking respectable.

                • bbmoney

                  Just thinking about 2015 again and the randomness of how things could look. Shark’s actually a great example. 2 years ago Shark was a struggling reliever who couldn’t throw enough strikes to be effective…………..so it’s certainly possible if things break right.

              • Jono

                And that’s a great point; everyone / everything has a price

      • Jay

        Totally agree. In his case, his age isn’t really an accurate barometer. With the low number of innings he’s thrown, his arm is more like 25 than 28. I would like to see the feeding frenzy from ALL teams if word got out we were even considering it.

  • Timmy

    The team is so awful and so far away from competing that I would trade him for the right package.

  • TonyS

    It would have to be bradley+ skaggs + 2 other quality prospects. #1 farm system here we come. As brett says, it would decimate our rotation so it would have to be a ridiculous return. I would go for it. Take a run at scherzer and price in the off season.

    • Hansman1982

      If trading shark and garza doesn’t give us the #1 farm system then it’s time to just pack your bags as a Cubs fan and leave, it’s not worth it.

      • ari gold

        At least we’d be better than the Cardinals in 1 area. LOL

    • Chad

      Scherzer, yes, but probably not . Price, no. Not with his arm injury and unknowns with it. I like Scherzer, but he is only controlled through 2015, same as Shark, and he’s more expensive arbirtration option. You have to go with young guys that you can control if you trade Samardzija.

      • TonyS

        Price’s injury similar to garza’s? I wouldnt mind if we signed garza to an extension with the form he’s showing at the moment. Understand your point re elbow injuries but could be a risk worth taking.

  • Tommy K

    You wish you were a little bit taller? I wish I was a baller. I wish I had a girl. If I did, I would call her.

    • Hansman1982

      Maybe some 22″ rims on you chevrolet Impala?

    • EvenBetterNewsV2.0

      Don’t forget about the rabbit and the hat.

      • Die hard

        Or birds in the bush rather than one in hand?

        • ari gold

          That reference went about 5000 feet over your head

  • Caleb

    Diamondbacks: “hey theo, we were wondering what you want for samardzia.”
    Theo: “two samardzias.”

    • Tommy K

      More like two maybe Samardzias, plus other stuff.

  • Timmy

    At this point I think they’d resign Milton Bradley if he came cheap and expendable. This team is a revolving door for washed up players who can’t behave. I DeJesus is a quality addition in some ways but I don’t see any insightful moves from which the team could build. A handful of good prospects, but any team with a high payroll can get those.

    Bad owner, a GM with a “vision” for losing for a long time, good players slumping because they have no lineup protection which is keeping them from progressing…

    The freakin Pirateas are making us look bad.

    This is all very depressing.

    • Tommy K

      Have you been paying any attention to the pitchers they have signed?

      Theo and Company inherited a terrible organization, both at the major league and minor league level. They had two options. One, they could keep doing what the previous administration did and overpay for big name players. Or, they could start by building up the minor league roster and then supplement that with free agents to fill holes once the young players are ready. They chose not to continue the failed policies of the past. That is a good thing, but it means the major league roster is not going to be good for a couple years. The plan requires that the major league roster be filled out with affordable players who have the potential to surprise. You’re not going to hit on every one of those guys, I don’t care who you are. Ian Stewart was a miss, but it didn’t hurt the club long term like missing on a big money free agent would. Kevin Gregg was a hit. Paul Maholm was a hit. Scott Feldman looks like a hit. Nate Schierholtz looks like a hit.

      The plan is working so far, but we won’t see the results on the major league level until probably 2015. Yes, the last two seasons have been depressing, and next season will probably be depressing too. But keep your eye on the prize.

      • Kyle

        Those weren’t the only two options.

        • JOE

          Then what other options would you have proposed? Not saying that there aren’t other options, but, generally speaking, front offices do indeed choose between those two game plans when rebuilding. I, for one, am happy that Theo/Jed, Co. chose this route, even if it is painful at the moment.

        • jt

          You are assuming that Rizzo has reached his potential even though he has restructured his swing.
          You are assuming that Castro’s new approach will fail or that he would have gotten to where he is going to end by following the path he had been on.
          You are assuming that Valbuena would have been the hitter he is today ( he is not the image of Eddie Mathews but he is not like Ian Stewart either ) without the approach he learned the 2nd half of last year.
          You are assuming that Castillo will not improve as a hitter as he has improved as a catcher.
          *
          You are assuming that they should have know that the failures of Camp and Marmol were inevitable.
          You are assuming the failure of E. Jackson was to be inevitable.
          *
          Lots of assumptions
          *
          They knew there were to be some rocks in the road to development of some players and have decided to allow them to travel a bumpy road.
          They knew there would be some misses in the signing of players but they also found some gems that will help long term.
          *
          Two years to accumulate and evaluate is what they have asked for.
          Now, after 1.5 years they have the trade pieces others desire.
          Now, after 1.5 years they are in a position to stride forward.
          *
          At the start I believed this was to be an interesting process to watch develop.
          I, for one, have not been disappointed.

          • Kyle

            I don’t recall assuming any of those things, or even touching vaguely on the subjects.

            • Rich H

              Kyle we seem to be of the same mind set on a lot of what the Cubs should be doing. What would you do with Shark? I think offering him an extension some time between now and end of the season would be the solid move.

              If you come out on one before the trade deadline and he balks then move him. If you wait till the offseason then move him that works too (probably better return with MLB ready players).

              I think now the ball should be in his court. Does he want to be here or does he want to make money. Not saying low ball him just make it fair market value for potential because even at 28 he is far from a finished product.

              • Kyle

                If I were the Cubs? Sit down and cry, I guess.

                I have a strong aversion to extending starting pitchers when you don’t have to. It’s a high-attrition position. Guys get hurt or just lose their stuff constantly.

                Samardzija’s under team control for two full years after this one. Unless I know that my payroll is dropping or I have internal analysis that says I just have absolutely no shot in 2014, I just let it play out for now and decide what to do with him later.

                • Rich H

                  I think we have a shot at .500 next year. The numbers say we should be .500 this year. Shark should be a big part of that moving forward but he has to want to be here.

                  The uncertainty in the arbitration process has to be factored in. So if we could sign him on a Sanchez type deal (5/80m) buying out 3 years of free agency and getting cost control over the short term then that is something we have to look at.

                  I do not want to trade Shark but at what point do you go well he is making it apparent that he would rather see free agency than be a part of what is building here?

                  With the way this team is built going forward the Cubs need to know where he stands so they know how much they have to spend on players and upgrades at other positions.

                  • Kyle

                    I think we have a shot at being .500 quality too, though a .500 team may perform like a .470 team in this division.

                    The arbitration process isn’t *that* uncertain. We’re not going to have to crap out and pay him $25m for one year or something. We should be able to guess what he’ll get within a few million either way, at the worst.

                    Pitchers are waaaay too fickle and way too injury prone to be committing a ton of extra money to one when we don’t have to.

          • Timmy

            I’m with you guys on this except for the new owners pocketing revenues as profits. Those people are horrible and they’re ruining the team. I’ll give Theo another year, but he’s going to have to do some insightful stuff for me to not think he’s just some bogus kid with a lucky stint in Boston. He can’t seem to manage building and contending at the same time.

            • Danimal8

              You don’t believe you are jumping the gun a bit? We went from one of the worst farm clubs to one of the best in less than two seasons. You cannot build a baseball team in a year, it simply isn’t the way it works in baseball. He is building incredibly well, in the initial stages it can be painful, exactly like we were told. Why do people still act like this is a surprise? Are you mad about the small amounts of money we squandered on high upside reclamation projects? Are you mad we didn’t blow the bank on free agents like Albert Pujols or Zack Greinke? Do you not think the money being spent overseas and in the states on modernizing our organization is going to good use? Ok ok ok, I guess you are right, we should have signed Upton, Pujols, Marcum, Hamilton,Greinke, Dickey…

              • Kyle

                I really don’t think it was “one of the worst,” though I guess that depends on how you define “one of the.”

                But we have made a dramatic turnaround in the last two and a half years. In that time we’ve:

                2011: Spent roughly $20 million on combined IFA spending and the draft, signing numerous overslots. Drafted in the top 10. Let go two FAs, one of them somewhat key, for draft compensation.
                2012: Committed roughly $35m (with the potential to escalate to much more with Soler’s contract) to IFA prospects. Traded half a dozen big leaguers for prospects. Kept a pitcher from the Rule 5 draft. Had a No. 6 overall pick plus previously stated comp picks. Lost a bajillion games for draft and IFA positioniong.
                2013: Drafted No. 2 overall. We’re about to trade probably another half-dozen major leaguers for prospects and maneuver ourselves to be one of the biggest IFA spenders if not the single biggest.

                When you do all that, you darn well better have the best farm system in the league or really close to it. Anything less with that resource commitment would be awful.

                • Timmy

                  That 35m is of course partly spread over several years. Other teams consider that kind of money a non-payroll investment defined by general operations.

              • Timmy

                Conspicuous omission makes for a bad argument. We could just as easily have pocketed Fielder, Hunter, Bourn, Pierre, Reynolds, Swisher, etc. Picking only the most overpaid players just conceals how unimaginative they’ve been, or the more likely explanation, that Theo has been restricted to pay for the roughly 160m we have in revenues for free agents. 50m is missing from the budget, probably paying for failed bison hot dog projects and the new walmart they’re going to build under the scoreboard.

                • Danimal8

                  With the possible acception of Fielder (possible), I would not be building a team around any of the players you mentioned. I think with few movable pieces and some serious bad luck they have been incredibly imaginative. I just enjoy how we seem to downplay the business acumen of this front office. Lots of weekend economists attempting to convince themselves that they have a better plan. The point of the matter is we haven’t even gotten to first base with this front office.

                  • Timmy

                    I like this comment and am willing to eat my admittedly impatient words as a big fan of the team. So far I think the owners have been despicable about team payroll and this has severely hurt Theo’s chances. And he’s been short sighted about young player development by leaving them unprotected by senior players/mentors in the lineup. He’s a stats guy, not a great talent scout, and it’s showing with this combination of problems.

    • Josh

      Milton Bradley was in jail last time I saw

      • Timmy

        Too bad for Theo, he was seriously considering him for pitcher!

  • Blublud

    A package from the Dbacks for Shark would have to start with Bradley, Skaggs and another 10-15 prospect if not another top 10 and istantly make the Cubs system #1 baseball.

    • Die hard

      No– start with Campana– Theo likes reclamation projects

  • Die hard

    Let him go— he’s over achieving –
    better to trade one yr early than one yr late

  • Chad

    Someone mentioned Travis Wood. I wonder what he could get in return. Could he get a Skaggs or a Bradley? Probably not, but if he could get a Skaggs I would make that trade in a hurry.

    • TonyS

      It would be interesting to see what teams offer for him.
      He’s been as solid as they come this season. Just doesnt have the upside but years of control is a plus. Interesting times.

    • Cedlandrum

      NO he wouldn’t get either of them in return.

    • X the Cubs Fan

      Wood IMO could get whatever Gallardo could but it wouldn’t be a Skaggs, Bradley type.

  • dob2812

    Dave Cameron was asked who would say no to a trade of Shark for Profar and he went with the Rangers. I thought that was interesting.

    This sounds like it came from the Cubs. They’re having a look to see what he might generate in return. There’s no harm in asking.

    • CubFan Paul

      Cameron might be wrong on that.

    • Assman22

      Rangers prefer Garza and his stock his off the charts right now, even higher than I thought. Scouts are all thumbs up on his recovery…Cubs could blow up entire rotation in the next 30 days…

      • bbmoney

        The assman speaketh.

      • Stinky Pete

        Anyone have Justin Germano’s phone number?

        • TonyP

          ha

      • college_of_coaches

        Nice, thanks Assman! Does anyone know what the story is behind Mike Olt? He hasn’t been able to continue his success from AA into AAA this season, and I’m wondering if it is the level of play or some other factor.

        • Rich H

          He was having an issue with his eyes. I do not know if that has been corrected now or not.

  • Mike

    Start with Archie Bradley and Stryker Trahan then a couple random top 30 pitchers

    • Coolbeans

      this

    • Rebuilding

      Stryker Trahan…love this kid. If he can just stick at catcher his bat is off the charts

      • Mike

        this would be the only kinda deal that makes sense for me, Aside from drafting quite a few catchers in this years draft we have been pretty lacking in our system at that postion. And i really dont think we have anyone comparable to Trahan in our system. Bradley I think is gonna be the better of him and Skaggs and if an offer starts with those 2 kids I think we really have to consider it.

  • Randy

    Brett thanks for posting this, because it’s fun to think about and it’s intriguing to know that other teams have taken notice of Sharky’s development. However, there’s little point in discussing the potential prospects we might ask for from Arizona, because this simply isn’t going to happen.

    We’re shopping all of our existing pitching trade bait in an effort to get prospects, so why would we give up the one *proven* front end starter on our staff that we actually have some team control over leading up to when we should hopefully be competitive?

    It’d be one thing if we had a pitching messiah or two in the upper minors, to plug into the rotation and let develop at the MLB level, but I don’t think our front office would be willing to project an entire rotation out of prospects without one sure thing to build around. Especially with the E. Jackson has been pitching.

    • dob2812

      If it makes you better, it makes you better.

      Also throwing 97 mph is bad for your arm.

      • Randy

        Agreed, but personally I feel better about Samardzija’s chances of being able to throw 97 and not be as injury prone. Guys like Carl Crawford just show how each person’s likelihood of being hurt can vary. Samardzija was taking hits by some pretty huge linebackers in college and made it through relatively unscathed.

        I don’t know if there’s a correlation to wear and tear of pitching, medically, but he’s pretty been pretty damn durable (knock on wood). Seeing prospects like Bundy out for at least a year and a half now kind of scares me about those super young pitching prospects.

    • King Jeff

      What if he brought back two pitching messiah’s for the upper levels of the minors? I’d think that the Cubs would be stupid not to at least consider an offer of say Skaggs and Corbin, or Skaggs and Bradley. I know it’s not likely, but this is the team that traded Bauer for a discount because they didn’t like his makeup, and has a history of trading away good young players, why not listen?

  • CubsFanSaxMan

    If the price is right . . . . let him go. That also goes for anyone else on the team . . . . Castro?

    • Carew

      No

  • Dustin S

    It’s fun to think about the huge haul Shark might bring, and AZ does have some quality trade chips. But, trading him would almost be a concession that 2014 for sure and probably 2015 will still not be even wild-card contending years. 4 straight seasons of going in knowing they aren’t wild card contenders would challenge all but the most hardcore fans I think. Maybe 2016-17 is the start of their winning window after all, although that would be a bit depressing. So it’s interesting to kick around, but we should be careful what we wish for with Samardzija. You need ace SPs to win in the playoffs too once the Cubs (someday) get back there.

    • TonyS

      Very true. The offer would have to blow their socks off. The dbacks must feel their window is opening. Fingers crossed they get a bit crazy.

  • Patrick G

    If the Cubs could get Skaggs and Bradley, that would be a good start getting two top pitching prospects. And if they traded Garza to Toronto for maybe Aaron Sanchez, that would be a good start in replenishing the minors pitching talent. Along with a Feldman trade, who knows what you’ll get with him also. If those 3 pan out, the Cubs would have a good staff by 2014-2015 and maybe sign a top tier pitcher to lead the staff.

  • Kyle

    If they don’t plan on taking a reasonable shot in 2014 (and I have no idea what their plans are right now), then trading Samardzija would make sense and almost be mandatory, as much as I don’t want to do it. It’d be a lot like holding on to Garza last spring if they didn’t.

  • another JP

    Dealing Shark isn’t a priority right now so I don’t think this AZ deal would ever get further than the rumor stage, but if any organization would have the pitching prospects capable of trading to the Cubs they would be one of them. And it might take more than prospects to obtain Shark right now… he could be a 5+ WAR pitcher this season and reach ace status. Those guys aren’t easy to acquire… especially with a couple seasons of control.

  • Matt23

    Does the fact that Shark doesn’t seem interested in an extension change the math here? I’d love to see the cubs extend him by 3-4 years and get some cost certainty through the heart of a projected run in contention. Seems like Shark wasn’t interested when the team approached him earlier this year. If the Cubs think he’s going to pitch out his contract then go to the highest bidder on a big-money contract, now might be the time to maximize return, rather than lose him two years from now when (hopefully) we are better and return would be less.

  • Oswego Chris

    For whatever reason, some fans see these guys approaching 30 and they automatically think they will be washed up…sometimes guys just start getting good at 28, 29…and some of them are post TJS and perhaps less risky…the Cardinals have made a living doing this…Cris Carpenter didn’t start winning until 29, after battling tons of injuries in Toronto…and the Cards won two titles with him in his 30’s…

    My point…if I were a GM, I place a lot of value on guys like Garza, Feldman, and Maholm last year…

    • Cedlandrum

      Well unless we start having Dave McKay ordering shipments from LaRussa it is pretty safe to say that our guys won’t be dominating well into their 30’s.

  • Beer Baron

    If AZ is serious and willing to offer their top pieces, you have to consider it. The Cubs probably won’t be competitive until 2015 at the earliest – which would be Samardzija’s walk year. There’s no guarantee he’ll resign with the Cubs, and indications are if he does it won’t be for a discount. So in 2 years you either lose him or resign a 30 year old power pitcher to a big money deal – neither are great scenarios. I would expect a major package from AZ, but if they’re willing I would be seriously considering it.

  • Tom

    Are the Cubs trying not to be bad in 2014? Does Ricketts approve of such talk?

  • Justin

    Bradley and Skaggs for Shark. Hell Yes I would do it if I was the Cubs. I get the fact the Cubs have crap minor league pitching and he’s proven. But it’s going to take a HUGE extension for Jeff to stick around, and he’ll be entering his 30’s. Pretty much never works out to pay a pitcher at that point in his career. The Cubs aren’t going to be a contendor next yr anyway, I hope they try to win but they need to be honest with themselves. No one from the Minors is going to offer much help next year. 2015 and 2016 is what they need to build for.

  • Mak

    What’s with the obsession in having some experts rank the cubs as the #1 system?

    • TonyS

      The farm isnt the be all and end all but it must be a good indicator fo future success. Our top prospects are two years away from contributing so why not convert some relatively old proven players into prospects likely to assist when our window is open.

      • TonyP

        Kansas City had a ton of top 100 guys in few years ago (7-9 maybe, can’t remember). How is that working out for them? They traded some to TB for Shields and whatever but still…..

        • Beer Baron

          Similarly, Seattle’s had one of the very best pitchers in the game for the past 5 years – yet have finished at the bottom of the worst division in baseball in 4 of those 5 seasons. One great player can only do so much and if you have many needs – as the Cubs do – sometimes its better to parlay that one player into several. But it is a crap shoot for sure

          • TonyP

            Yep, I understand that. Just making a point that not all prospects pan out. There is a lot of people on here that make comments that seem like they don’t get that.

      • mak

        My point has nothing to do with churning out good young players; obviously thats a good thing. But the thinking that “oh boy, if we do this, we’ll DEFINITELY have the #1 farm system” is a bit silly, no?

  • Rcleven

    Shark should not be a mid season trade. Trade him to get better yes.
    First things first. Garza and Feldman go first. See what you get and make your adjustments from there.
    Shark can bring a Geo type return. There are just so many holes to fill.

  • Justin

    I mean lets be honest. Every player has a price. With the exception of Trout, Machado, and Harper. Clearly the Cubs trading Jeff S. seems counter intuitive considering the Cubs minor league pitching sucking so bad. But if the Dbacks want to pay out the ass for him. Bring it on..

    • TonyS

      Like

    • cerambam

      Also like

    • caryatid62

      Trout and Harper have a price: Harper’s price is Trout and Trout’s price is Harper.

  • TonyP

    If you trade Shark you better not miss on the prospects coming back…………….

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+