Quantcast

jeff samardzija gatorade showerIn the run-up to the Trade Deadline, one of the most prominently featured Chicago Cubs names in trade rumors belonged to Jeff Samardzija. The prominence of that name had a bit more to do with his stature as a potential front-of-the-rotation arm than with the depth of the rumors, but the Cubs did legitimately seem to at least be listening.

The team most connected to Samardzija in those rumors? The Arizona Diamondbacks, from the whom the Cubs reportedly requested top pitching prospects Archie Bradley (who might be the top pitching prospect in the game) and Tyler Skaggs. As you’d expect, the talks died from there.

Fast-forward to this evening, and Buster Olney revives the rumors as literally as possible:

Samardzija’s value has likely declined a bit since those original talks, not solely because of his lackluster second half performance (his advanced stats remain strong), but also because he now comes with another half season less of control. He also comes with the knowledge that his hometown-ish team – which has publicly stated it would like to keep him with an extension – was unable to work out such an extension because of his demands. A buying team may have to accept that it is buying only two seasons of Samardzija.

That said, I’m sticking by my long-held position on trading Samardzija: two seasons is a long time, and anything can happen over those two years. That is especially true if you have breakout candidates like Samardzija on the team. So, against that backdrop, and peripherals/stuff/scouting/velocity/etc. that tell me Samardzija could be truly special, I don’t see any reason for the Cubs to part with Samardzija for anything short of top dollar. If it’s the Diamondbacks, that means Bradley-plus. An outrageous demand? Maybe. But it’s not like the Cubs would be dealing from a position of strength, and they’d have no reason to make the move short of picking up tip-top pitching prospect(s) in return. If the Diamondbacks wanted to try and overwhelm with Skaggs-Delgado-plus-plus, you listen. But Bradley is the steak.

We’ll have to keep a close eye on Samardzija trade rumors this offseason, because, if an extension isn’t coming, this front office will always consider converting shorter-term value to longer-term. I’d just want to see them get enough for this particular shorter-term value. Because he’s a very good one.

  • Dumpgobbler

    I’d pull the trigger on Skaggs, Delgado and Trahan for Shark. I’d want Bradley but he’s not a must for me personally.

    • Nate Dawg

      Well if he’s not a must for Dumpgobbler, he’s not for me either.

      • Dumpgobbler

        Gobbled.

  • http://Bleachernation.com Frank

    I don’t think they let Bradley go. I would take Skaggs and Delgado and/or Eaton. Maybe if we add players it could get interesting.

  • Greg

    6 years of Archie Bradley please!

  • Brian Peters

    deal him!

  • Die hard

    Only if get Campana back

    • DarthHater

      YES!

    • Patrick W.

      I would insist on Campana and Brenly.

    • Gabe Athouse

      I second. You mean as a batboy, right?

    • DarthHater

      Then flip Campana to Sawx for the right to interview Lovullo.

      • Tony_S

        HA!

      • Wilbur

        We’ll played …

  • Turn Two

    Bradley, skaggs for samardjiza, baez?

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      *PASS.*

      • Turn Two

        Me too, but its where they will stay if we started samard for both of them. Compromise is somewhere in the middle.

    • jayrig5

      While there’s no way I’d include Baez (his value alone is comparable to Bradley, for me, if not in excess of) I do wonder if the Cubs would include one of their positional prospects (not necessarily top 4, but a Villanueva-type) in a Samardzija to sweeten a return. I’m assuming yes, especially if it’s to get Bradley plus another quality arm.

      • roz

        I’d definitely do that. We have the third base depth with Bryant, Olt, and Jeimer Candelario.

  • Eric

    I don’t see why asking for unproven prospects for a proven maybe-TOR pitcher is out of the question. Stick to your guns and get Skaggs and Bradley.

  • Kevin F.

    Have to have Bradley in any deal. No two ways about it.

  • toby

    Would AZ consider Holmberg, Skaggs, and a PTBNL for Shark?

  • Gabe Athouse

    This should make for weeks of fake ridiculous trade scenerios

    • Tony_S

      Yes, but it’ll keep us off of the fact that we still won’t have a manager by then

    • Turn Two

      Better than the recent “conversations”/attacks that have been on these posts.

  • CubChymyst

    Wasn’t there a rumor that Towers likes Junior Lake. So Lake + Samardzija for Bradley, Skaggs + someone else.

    • CubChymyst

      I can’t find that rumor anywhere, maybe I am miss remembering it.

    • LWeb23

      Serves KT right. Junior Lake tore it up in Arizona in his second series up. First career HR in a 4-hit performance.

  • ETS

    ummm they traded away upton so i’m less interested now.

  • Dumpgobbler

    The underrated bit of all this is Shark probably wants to sign with a legitimate contender, meaning trading him now will give us the best yield on any return.

  • Bob from Salem

    PLEASE….Keep Baez out of that trade!

  • Danno

    What about Samardzija’s history tells you he is a top of the rotation starter? His career as a Cub is slightly north of mediocre.

  • Brains

    Bank it, we’ll either trade him for a blind third baseman, or keep him on the trade line so long that he loses all value and gets discouraged and ceases to pitch as effectively as before.

    • Brains

      Yes, he’s a “classic” #3 pitcher. This is a good thing. We just happen to lack #1, #2, and #4 pitchers. Jackson does very nicely as a back-up catcher.

      • Brains

        Are you?

    • http://odu Greenroom

      I am guessing you are not a fan of CJ Edwards? ridiculous.

  • Die hard

    The Shark always becomes sushi against good teams– they can’t get enough of him and always ask for more

    • YourResidentJag

      Gotta say, I agree. Yes, that’s right, I agree.

    • Wilbur

      I like the analogy. We’ll done …

    • Brains

      see goat? you said the exact same thing the other day. why do you always pick on die hard?

      • MichiganGoat

        [img]http://0-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/vp/image/1366/20/1366207210388.jpg[/img]

  • http://www.survivingthalia.com Mike Taylor (no relation)

    #1. Bradley
    #8. Chaffin
    #12. Perez
    #15. Drury

  • Blackhawks1963

    If Arizona would trade Archie Bradley for Samardzija then I’d give my left nut. The time is now to move Spellcheck, and Bradley would be an outstanding center piece to a deal.

  • Nathan

    If Bradley is out of the question, which I assume he is, I’d much rather trade him to a team like the Pirates or Nationals. Taillon or Giolito as the center piece.

    • Blackhawks1963

      The only way I cut a deal with Arizona is Archie Bradley coming to Chicago.

  • Jim L

    Skaggs, Trajan, one of Holmberg/Delgado would work for me.

  • YourResidentJag

    How about we consider the fact that, if he’s valuable to Arizona, he’s valuable to other teams. Yep, you’re right, Brett. A lot can happen. He can become a distraction to a regime that doesn’t need one more. Like others, he can succumb to injury. He can agree to the terms in $$$ that Cubs feel are agreeable but ultimately not agree to a contract because of that lack of NTC. Or he can continue to regress as a SP with more exposure.

    Involve as many teams as possible in this because why not….it’s the offseason.

    • Blackhawks1963

      The teams who would be seriously interested in Samardzija is lengthy. Yankees, Orioles, Blue Jays, Indians, Royals, Rangers, Angels, Phillies, Mets, Nationals, Dodgers, Diamondbacks, Padres.

      I am not sold on Samardzija. There is no questioning his arm or his latent talent. But the guy is enigmatic…and I lost a measure of respect for him this past season when he would continually visibly show his disgust when his defense blew a play or the offense couldn’t score. You don’t show up your teammates. Never. Not even if you are playing for the worst team in baseball and you yourself are Babe Ruth in his prime.

      • EvenBetterNewsV2.0

        Actually, Babe Ruth did that a lot, and he played on the best teams most every year he was in the majors. I mean, he wasn’t Ty Cobb or anything, but he wasn’t the most gracious loser.

  • J.L.

    I’m a little perplexed to see both the idea of trading Samardzija and the idea of trading for Price being thrown around by so many of us as potentially reasonable moves by the FO. I mean, if one of those makes any sense, the other has to be stupid, right?

  • dumbledoresacubsfan

    No wishes or trade rumors on my end.

    Just make the deal happen. As long as we add Bradley, dump Samardzija and keep our big 4 I’ll be happy.

  • OJ

    What universe is this? My god. Reality check. DBacks aren’t gonna give up Bradley for Shark. Adjust your expectations, please.

    • YourResidentJag

      Jason Parks ‏@ProfessorParks 5m
      The DBacks should. RT @bleed_cub_blue @ProfessorParks Archie Bradley for Jeff Samardizija, who says no?

    • North Side Irish

      I think you’re almost certainly right, but I would have said the same thing about trading Bauer for Gregorious.

  • jeff1969

    I’m doubting Bradley will be in a deal for Shark. Maybe something like Shark & Russell for Skaggs, Holmberg, and Pollock?

    • On The Farm

      This seems like a reasonable proposal.

    • cub2014

      which prospect would you rather have?

      20yr old career era 2.76 whip 1.228
      21yr old career era 1.72 whip 0.949
      23yr old career era 2.42 whip 1.041

      I want all 3: Bradley,Edwards,Hendricks

      • EvenBetterNewsV2.0

        Yikes, so the ERA is what made you want all 3?

        • cub2014

          Ya your right I hate low era and low whip.

      • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

        For those numbers to really be useful for comparison, it would good to provide what league they were earned in. Providing the average numbers for the league in that year would be even better.

        For example, I would likely be more impressed by an ERA of 2.25 in the California League than I would be by an ERA of 1.95 in the Florida State League.

        • cub2014

          those are minor league career numbers.
          but yes bradley had AA numbers similiar
          to hendricks AA numbers and similiar to
          edwards A numbers. the point I was making
          is we have a couple really successful minor
          league pitchers maybe not same upside as
          Bradley but both very good.

          • cub2014

            i think they will both be pitching in
            chicago in the next couple of years.

            they have had much greater minor
            league success than any of our 5
            current starters minors results.

    • YourResidentJag

      As long as it includes Skaggs and Holmberg, possibly. I’m concerned about Skaggs velocity and fastball. Flat in the majors and hit hard for HRs.

  • Cub Lew

    Would Shark, Lake, Villanueva, and throw-in be enough for Bradley and Skaggs and throw-in or too much?

    • OJ

      DBacks would not touch that deal.

  • Mike

    I just don’t see Jeff as being a building block piece. He can be a good innings eater for a contending team. Jeff is a tail end of the rotation pitcher…I am sure Arizona can find one of those for a lot cheaper of a price than Skaggs or Bradley in the trade market or even via free agency.

  • Assman22

    Don’t be surprised if it’s Shark/Lake in the trade talks with the Dbacks…Towers has always loved Junior Lake…Dbacks have scoffed at the FO’s asking price for 2 years now and not much has changed…

    • X The Cubs Fan

      What do you think that duo could fetch?

    • YourResidentJag

      There’s the key to a trade with AZ…”not much has changed…” Shop him to more teams.

      • Assman22

        Dbacks don’t view Shark as a potential ace…in other words, they don’t value him as much as a few AL clubs do…this speculative report may be just smoke…nothing has changed as far as offers between Cubs and Dbacks…

        • Dumpgobbler

          Nothing will change unless the Cubs decide to cave and take a smaller package for him. Best to move on to the Royals. I could certainly see the Royals backing up the truck for him. I like Zimmer a lot. Almonte, Selman and Gallagher also interest me as well as Starling and the big time arm of Ventura.

          • jt

            A package with Zimmer makes sense to me. Seems like it would take mult-players from both sides though?

            • X The Cubs Fan

              Big trades always do.

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

            After the degree to which Tampa looted KC last off season, I would love to see the Cubs go plunder the Royals. I have no problem kicking terrible front offices when they are down.

            • YourResidentJag

              Who knows really, though? Maybe they caught so much flak public that it got back to them and they’ll be more cautious.

            • Assman22

              Cubs have been and are using the Shields trade as precedent for Shark offers…Royals have an offer on the table from Cubs of Shark+SP…price is steep…O’s and Indians also have steep offers on the table for Shark from the Cubs…Royals have the best package coming back if accepted…

              • cubfanincardinalland

                Do the Cubs take a run at Bundy coming off Tommy John and Gausman or Rodriguez? Some quality arms.

    • CubChymyst

      This is where I read Towers love Lake. Thought I saw that somewhere.

  • http://None Cubbieblue29

    I dont think we should be getting rid of the guys who will be a part of the playoff push. Sure Shark isnt an ace but he is a hell of a 2 or 3 in the rotation. If we keep trading for younger we are giving away pieces that are going to be a part of the future.

    • On The Farm

      You can think of it like that. Or another way to think about it is we could be trading him for our Michael Wacha (/future 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+