Quantcast

nate schierholtz cubsThere’s still an hour – plus spillage time – to go before the Trade Deadline, but we’re not hearing much on Nate Schierholtz all of a sudden, after previously being described as the most likely Cub to be traded.

Now, Nick Cafardo reports that it looks like Schierholtz is staying with the Cubs. We’ll see what happens, but, either way, there’s not really disappointment here. Schierholtz is plenty valuable to the Cubs going forward, and it could be that the overwhelming trade offer just wasn’t there. That’s ok.

That said, it would be a surprise – though not necessarily a disappointment – if neither Schierholtz nor David DeJesus is traded today.

UPDATE: Well that’s interesting. Jon Heyman reports that the Pirates made a play earlier today for Mark Trumbo from the Angels. Perhaps they backed away from any Schierholtz talks in favor of trying to get Trumbo. Since that didn’t work out, maybe they come back to the table at the last minute?

UPDATE 2: Multiple folks reporting the Rangers won’t be doing anything, and Bob Nightengale says the Pirates were unwilling to meet the Cubs’ price on Schierholtz and David DeJesus. No deal appears likely to happen.

  • CubFan Paul

    Disappointment for me. Schierholtz is nothing special

  • baseballet

    Nobody from our platoon gets left behind.

    • Jp3

      Awesome, I love we were apparently asking for a return suited for the 2nd best OPS performing RF… Might be a bit too much because if half his trade value was in his cost controlled years.

  • adamae24

    He’s a platoon player and that really hurts his value.

    • Drew7

      That’s a bit misleading though, since he plays against RHP. He’ll likely, barring injury, end the year with 450-500 PA’s.

  • JB88

    Obviously they are going for it …

  • JulioZuleta

    I’ll believe it at 3:10. Gotta sell high on him. He could end up being Marlon Byrd part 2 (Cubs shoulda traded him in year 1 when he was an All-Star, rather than wait until he was hitting 0.120).

    • William

      He’s a lot more talented than Byrd!

      • andoalex

        Also to be fair, Byrd was never the same after taking that fastball to the face. Just wasn’t.

        • JulioZuleta

          Except he’s arguably better than ever this year.

        • http://Thekarlinlawfirm.com Brad

          Didn’t he get busted for PEDs? I don’t want a player like that.

  • William

    Yay! :-)

  • Jesse

    Eh.

  • Kyle

    If true, it is the exact opposite of disappointing. I will be quite appointed if he stays.

    • jj

      Kyle, is your opinion about keeping Schierholtz because you believe he will continue his current pace through next season or is it that you prefer him even if he regresses to his career levels? His BA/OBP are in line with his career averages, but his slugging far exceeds anything he’s done before.

      • Kyle

        I’d expect something a little closer to his current season than his career averages, but some amount of regression to the mean is likely.

    • http://www.hookersorcake.com Hookers or Cake

      The only reason I’d like to see them trade Dejesus or Schieholtz is that it would almost force us to get a FA Outfielder like Choo or someone. It would be nice to add a quality bat in the offseason.
      We should try to win in ’14. We have room to commit to a long term player or two. And the waves and waves should start reaching shore by ’15

      • Diggs

        They could still get a good FA outfielder even if they keep both Schierholtz and DeJesus. Probably will.

    • Coop

      This reminds me of a discussion I had with a friend – I assume the opposite of disgruntled is gruntled. This I like. I am very gruntled by this turn of events.

  • Chris

    Yes it is!

  • Pingback: MLB Trade Deadline Update: July 31 | Midway Madness

  • http://Thekarlinlawfirm.com Brad

    Looks like a piece of a winning cubs team in near future. Time to start putting the pieces of a winning team together that can compete and take the division in the next couple years. He looks to be a valuable member of those teams-he’s very solid IMHO

  • Danny Ballgame

    I’ve always thought that unless we get a good offer, he is a decent enough, cheap, ballplayer who can be flipped next year at the deadline.

  • VegasGoat

    Disappointing. Doesn’t matter to me that he has the FA market looks bad. There are undervalued assets during free agency and his value will never will be higher bc he has the cheap extra yr of control which boosts his value which no matter what won’t be as high next yr. trade him now. This team is bad and there is no point in keeping him unless the offers for him were complete low balls.

    • CubFan Paul

      This. All of it.

    • Kyle

      Just saying “there’s always value in the FA market” doesn’t handwave away all the value the Cubs get from keeping a useful outfielder in his arbitration years for 2014, a year in which we most certainly do not that the team will be bad.

      • VegasGoat

        Just don’t get keeping a good trade chip whose value can only go down after the deadline and could probably garner a good return. This is a bad team.

        • bbmoney

          Which ignores the fact that he’s under contract for next year. And we don’t know next years team will be a bad team.

          Many suspect it, but no one knows it. I actually think we’ve got a reasonable shot to be competitive, so I have no issue keeping him around.

          • willis

            Put one more good arm and a power bat on this team and yes, they can compete. Not sure where they’ll find the power bat though (and if someone says “Olt” I’ll puke up my disgusting subway I just reluctantly ate because it’s next door to the office and I’m lazy as shit).

            • Danny Ballgame

              If we can grab Ellsbury and get production at 2B (Alcantara, Watkins, anybody but Barney) and any sort of power from 3B, we could be a decent enough team to go .500

              Any yes, I realize that these are all tall orders

              • Cubman23

                Without significant BP improvement, this team will not be .500 no matter what else you do.

                • Coop

                  Luckily, I think improving the bullpen could be one of the easier propositions. Haven’t look at the free agent options (although I know this coming FA is weak), but you can always find a workable BP arm on the cheap.

                  Closer/late-inning-stopper will be the one spot that can be harder to fill.

            • VegasGoat

              Does anyone think this cubs team will compete in 2014. IMO they won’t. Think depending on offseason movesi think we could be a .500 ball club.

              • willis

                See above, not too many pieces away actually. Rizzo and Castro will have better years, there are enough arms to piece together a good BP, need to add one very good starter and some pop…wallah! Competing.

                Surely a tall task, especially the last part of my wants/needs but it’s doable.

            • VegasGoat

              Willis: what’s your definition of competing? .500 next season. We’d stillmprobably be 4th in the division with a .500 record

              • willis

                Nah, I’d be happy with .500 this season. I’d say a little above .500 next season…5-7 games in the end keeps things tight. But you are right, Cardinals will always be awesome, Pittsburgh is scratching their surface and the Reds will be good again. Tough division.

        • Kyle

          Because he’s under team control for 2014, useful for 2014, and we absolutely do not know that 2014 will see a bad Cubs team.

          This is a baseball team that fields a roster of baseball players to try to win baseball games, not a stock portfolio.

          • mudge

            Right.

          • hansman1982

            “This is a baseball team that fields a roster of baseball players to try to win baseball games, not a stock portfolio.”

            Actually, acquiring baseball players to win games is highly similar to a stock portfolio. You acquire some assets that will, fairly predictably, raise in value and then pay dividends when they reach peak value. You hope to avoid buying high (Pujols) and would rather slightly overpay on a growth stock (Darvish). Some players will have periods of time they outperform where they should be at and underperform where they should be. Schierholtz went from under-perform to over-perform this year.

            If you can sell him for good value, get a player who should perform well in the future AND get a different player who is currently on the under-perform list, you want to do that. Now, if what you are receiving for him isn’t good enough, then so be it.

            • Ken

              Oh my goodness. GM in training.

            • Kyle

              It’s a moderately useful analogy, but there are places where it diverges and it loses it’s usefulness. Many people take the analogy to extremes and end up in situations where what they are arguing for would be correct in a stock market but is not correct for a baseball team.

        • Drew7

          Because he’s a cost-controlled player that can help win games in 2014.

          • VegasGoat

            Does anyone think this cubs team will compete in 2014. IMO they won’t. Think depending on offseason movesi think we could be a .500 ball club.

            • Kyle

              Yes. People who are correct think the Cubs have a chance to compete in 2014.

              • Internet Random

                A better question might be, “What are the chances that the Cubs are competing for a playoff spot at this time next year?”

                I have a chance of winning the lottery… the odds are pretty long, but I do have a chance.

                • Kyle

                  I’d say at least 25%.

                  • VegasGoat

                    Sorry Kyle I respect the heck out of your opinions but I don’t think I could say chance are even at 25% but it sounds like your banking on the cubs picking up a big bat this offseason? If so that would increase there chance but I don’t this cubs team getting past the cards, reds. Maybe the pirates but I think their starting pitching is worse then it looks and arent that good

                    • Kyle

                      I don’t think we’ll necessarily pick up one big piece, bat or arm. I do think we’ll plug quite a few holes with mid-level free agents.

                      There’s a *ton* of variance in baseball. Anybody decent has a chance, and we’ll be decent. People seem to forget that the Pirates were generally projected to be at or slightly under .500 this year. Or that the Nationals and Giants were considered likely to be strong contenders. Ish happens.

                    • Internet Random

                      That.

                    • bbmoney

                      Or that the Orioles and A’s were suppose to be terrible last year.

                  • Internet Random

                    I’m willing to go “about” 25 percent.

                    “At least” indicates a bit more hope than I have.

              • VegasGoat

                Do you think the cubs have real chance at the division next yr? IMO I don’t think we got a shot. I we did I would be thrilled but I guess it all depends on this offseason moves. We definitely need another big bat in the lineup. Don’t see the FO over paying for Cano or ellsbury. I think Choo is a great fit as long as we don’t have to over pay him or give up a draft pick if he gets a qualifying offer. I believe we’ll have the rotation to be pretty good but I’m not sure how were going to improve the line up. Trade? Maybe. I’m not an Olt believer. Hopefully this is just an outlier year and hopefully a coach can do something about his K rate to at least make bearable.

                • Kyle

                  The division? Probably not, but not impossible. One of the wild cards? Still probably not, but enough of a chance to warrant consideration.

                  • Jono

                    Want to put your money where your mouth is (or where your fingers are)?

                    • Kyle

                      I have a strict no-gambling policy. I bet, as always, my impeccable internet reputation.

                    • Jono

                      Haha, that’s pretty risky, kyle

              • Jono

                I’d be willing to make a bet that the Cubs don’t make the playoffs next year. I’ll give someone odds, of course. No joke. I’m serious. Real life bet, any takers?

                • willis

                  Because I’m an addicted gambler I’d be down with that. But at what odds? I can see a wild card push IF they make a trade splash like Price and acquire a decent bat.

                  • Jono

                    Given the uncertainty of the offseason, right now I’ll give 2:1. But if we wait until spring training and they haven’t added a major pieces, I’ll probably give 3:1 (subject to change).

                    • Rebuilding

                      I would guess, barring a Price or Stanton type trade, that Vegas will set the line on the Cubs making the playoffs next year at around 7:1 or 8:1 – so about 12-15%

                    • willis

                      I’d jump at 3:1 if there was one move of significance made to help the daddy team. I’d go even to 2.5:1 if two big moves are made. We’ll see.

                    • SirCub

                      Playoffs including WC birth? Or would they have to win the play-in game?

                    • Rebuilding

                      I would give you those odds all day. You think there is a 33 to 40% chance the Cubs make the playoffs next year?

                    • Jono

                      Willis- let’s keep this in mind.

                      SirCub- Winning play-in game, for sure

                    • Jono

                      Rebuild- I’ll take the other side on that, if you give me 8:1, I’ll bet that they do get in.

                    • willis

                      @rebuilding…probably not but it would be fun to make the bet. And I say that if they make those big moves. Stand pat and keep things as is, 6:1 or 7:1 is much more likely. Also, I’m adding in the thought that Rizzo and Castro will have better seasons.

                    • SirCub

                      I’d say, the team as its constructed right now, has about 6-7:1 odds of making the playoffs, then.

                      Could easily improve their standing to 4-5:1 by adding at the fringes.

                    • Rebuilding

                      Just spitballing where I think Vegas will set the line. They usually set the big teams short (so like 6:1) because they know the money will come in on them anyway as “fun” bets. I think 7:1 is fair

                    • SirCub

                      Yea, I’d tend to agree. But like Kyle’s been emphasizing, there’s a lot of variance. I’d say they’re looking at talent level of 75ish wins, with +/- 10 wins for a SD?

                    • Kyle

                      I said going into the season we were a 78-79 win team on paper, pre-dumping, and the peripherals have born that out.

                      Next year, I expect us to go into the season with something like an 81-83 win projection. +/- 12 wins, as always, without batting an eye.

                    • Jono

                      Does that mean you’re predicting 69-95 wins next year? I have to say, you’re probably going to be right

                    • Kyle

                      I’m predicting that 69 wins is definitely within the range of reasonably possible outcomes.

            • http://www.hookersorcake.com Hookers or Cake

              The payroll will be around 70 mil or less. We gotta add a couple of pieces. Maybe add Choo and Maybe Olt at 3rd and Alcantra at 2cnd? by the break – Lake super sub ala Derosa? Add a quality arm and some flyers – Castro and Rizz step up. We could should at least be 500 and fun to watch.

              • VegasGoat

                I don’t think Alcantara will be ready next year and if he is it won’t be till mid season. Choo would be great as long as we don’t over pay too much and don’t have o give up a draft pick. Lake needs to learn how to play the field at multiple position and grind out at bats before we can compare him to derosa, IMO. Olt I’m not confident in him at all, but at least he’d offer a good glove at third and some pop but that k rate scares me

            • hansman1982

              Considering this year’s team would be a .500 team half the time you run the past 100 games 10,000 times, next year’s team should contend.

        • ncsujuri

          It takes two to tango though….

    • http://www.viewfromthebleachers.com Norm

      I don’t get these type of complaints when teams end up keeping someone that was rumored to be available.

      OF COURSE the offers weren’t good enough, otherwise the player would have been traded.

      • VegasGoat

        Why keep a guy just bc he’ll be cheaply under control next yr? Makes no sense, if you can get decent prospects for the guy. Just bc he’s cheap next yr offers no value in my opinion! This the Chicago Cubs! Big market! Lots of money and room on the payroll. We can replace Schierholtz this offseason. I’m not advocating we go sign a big time free agent. I’m just saying there are always going to be those undervalued assets on the free agent market so sell Schierholtz now (assuming the offer is not complete low ball) and then we try and find the next Schierholtz in the offseason. I’m not suggesting that it is easy to find the next Schierholtz but its worth selling him off and trying while we’re still in the middle of a rebuild. (If we are getting low ball to the point where if Theo/Jed think if they held on to him and sold him off next season with only 2months of control left type offers, and they were getting similar offers then I completely see holding on to him.)

        • Kyle

          Because despite the exhortation “This is the Cubs!”, all indications are that we are under budget constraints that are quite a bit tighter than I’d like.

          You might be able to replace Schierholtz this offseason, but probably not at his price without expending other assets. And the combination of other costs and assets to acquire his replacement will come at the opportunity cost of doing something else down the roster, perhaps such as making a bullpen upgrade.

          His value to the team’s chances in 2014 are more important than yet another low level prospect.

        • http://www.viewfromthebleachers.com Norm

          You’re answering your own question. Your last few words are “I completely see holding on to him”. So if you see it, why are you complaining about it?

          • frank

            Especially when it looks like, at least in Theo/Jed’s opinion/s, the offers for him simply aren’t worth more than the value of keeping him.

  • Justin Koehneke

    If they don’t get an impact prospect I think its the right move. They can always trade him next year. I think his highest value is now though.

  • Patrick G

    Donde esta Assman?

  • Jono

    I like Nate’s game. Can’t go wrong with having more guys like him on the team

  • North Side Irish

    Tim Brown ‏@TBrownYahoo 1m
    Gotta say, the best thing about this trade deadline has been @KimDeJesus9.

    She’s gone national…

  • figgelbert

    Odd bit on WEEI sports radio Boston ABOUT 20 MIN AGO.
    Reported Rangers desperate for a bat and were shopping Matt Garza.
    Didn’t report the source.
    Did anyone mention it here?

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      See the Twitter dump a few posts ago.

    • X the Cubs Fan

      Yeah its kinda been covered kind of suspicious. 3 team trade? Garza and Dejesus to Pittsuburgh, Schierholtz, and Gregg to Rangers, Glasnow, Tony Sanchez and CBA pick to Cubs.

      • On The Farm

        Ha! That would be a hilarous trade

      • Tim

        There is no way the Rangers make that trade. Why would they give up Garza(who they just paid a premium for) to get Scherholtz and Gregg??? I hadn’t seen that rumor but that’s a joke.

  • adamae24

    So we’ve just decided to totally forgo IFA slot money?

  • William

    I do not get why so many people are complaining. People complain when we do not trade someone and if we did trade him and didn’t receive enough value, they would say “well, you should have kept him.”

    • Njriv

      Exactly, people act like they know that deals were being offered and which ones weren’t. We have no idea who the Pirates, Rangers or Cardinals’ offers were. The Cubs still have control over Schierholtz next year and they aren’t going to trade him just to trade him. If they saw no deal that they really liked and benefited the club, then hold onto him.

  • Jp3

    Look out for the Royals they just had a blockbuster go down acquiring Justin Maxwell… This begs the question, who is Justin Maxwell?

    • Edwin

      *Raises the question. Not begs the question.

      • frank

        You are correct, sir–and thank you.

      • Jp3

        Actually I was begging for the answer personally. I wasn’t saying it as a rhetorical question, I seriously want to know who Justin Maxwell is.

  • North Side Irish

    Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 15s
    Sources: #Orioles agree to acquire Norris from #Astros for Hoes and another piece. Finalizing now.

    • Jon

      Bitches and Hoes?

      • North Side Irish

        Orioles were going to play the Rockies in August which had people looking forward to Hoes facing Rockies reliever Rex Brothers…literally Bros vs Hoes…

    • On The Farm

      You mean all they had to give up was a garden tool and another piece, why didn’t the Cubs trade for Norris? I would think the grounds crew would have a few hoes to spare..

      • http://deepcenterfield.blogspot.com Jason Powers

        Chuckle….

  • notcubbiewubbie

    no im only disappointed that people overvalue average players like russell schierholtz ETC.those types of players mean absolutely nothing in the big picture.screw meaningless wins for this year!

    • Eternal Pessimist

      Would love to extend Schierholtz on a 3-4-5 year team friendly deal. As Drew7 pointed out earlier, he could get 440-500 AB’s every year. He would really be 80% of a platoon, with around an 800 OPS from the position. And we might expect 1-2 of our highly touted minor leaguers to make it to the bigs in 2-3 years, but we need to bridge that gap. Let’s sign him long term now!

      • notcubbiewubbie

        maybe 8 years 136,000,000 oh sorry we got rid of that guy!

  • Justin Koehneke

    refresh refresh refresh refresh refresh…………………….

  • MichiganGoat

    I’m shocked there hasn’t been more about the potential suspensions of the Biogenesis scandal.

  • William

    The Astros acquired Hoes! I hear he likes to blow the game!

  • Tim

    Have I missed any Assman post? If so, can someone fill me in. If not, can Assman make an appearance and give us what is going down. Thanks

  • Justin Koehneke

    IS BRETT AWAKE?

  • daveyrosello

    Most boring trade deadline evah.

  • Eric

    I’m sort of glad the Astros are in the AL now. They have put together some really nice pieces the past month or so. Picked up a good looking pitcher earlier.

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+