Quantcast

jeff samardzija gatorade showerWhile everything remains a “rumor” at this point, and the possibility of extending Jeff Samardzija beyond the two years the Cubs currently control still theoretically remains, the drumbeat for a trade increases.

CSN’s Dave Kaplan, who tends to be fairly well-sourced on these things, hears that a Samardzija trade is likely this offseason. How likely? A Major League source tells him it’s a 99 percent proposition. That’s usually the mark you give something that you know is going to happen, leaving yourself the 1% chance of a cataclysmic earthquake or some equally unlikely-but-theoretically-possible interference.

To be fair, the confidence sounds more like it comes from the fact that Samardzija hold so much trade value in this market for the Cubs that they won’t be able to resist trading him, rather than it coming from having heard that a deal – specific, or otherwise – is imminent.

Kaplan’s piece and his source’s thoughts are definitely worth a read, though. The price on Samardzija, as we’ve heard before, remains extremely high. As I’ve said, given the two years of control and the desirability of keeping Samardzija, there’s no reason for the Cubs to move him right now unless they are blown away. Keep those asking prices high, and see if one of the eight reportedly interested teams blinks. (Kaplan’s source hears that the frontrunners right now are the Blue Jays, Diamondbacks and Orioles, by the way.)

I’d be remiss if I didn’t at least mention the possibility that rumors like this – ones with so much positivity about Samardzija and about the likelihood that a trade comes together – could be well-designed by the Cubs to pressure Samardzija into once more coming to the table about an extension and thinking about accepting a reasonable deal if he wants to stay in Chicago. Even if the rumors aren’t intentionally being circulated to that end, they certainly could have that effect.

  • Blackhawks1963

    Ricky Nolasco is a Minnesota Twin. The pitching dominoes are starting to fall in the free agency market.

  • anonymous-ly

    How well did the Cubs choreograph their marketing message? From small whispers to slivers of information released morsel by morsel. We Cub fans are now all but pacified into accepting the reality that we will not readily compete until at the earliest 2016. Six or seven years of losing under the Ricketts regime and we are hungrily salivating at the return for trading our top pitcher away.

    That’s what we have been reduced to as Cub fans. I can’t believe I was contemplating trading Castillo away as a good thing. Nuts.

    • Blackhawks1963

      Yeah, because Lord knows Theo Epstein is an incompetent fool and the blueprint for winning had been working so well since 1908.

      • CubFan Paul

        When and where did Theo’s current blueprint for the Cubs work so well that he’s doing it in Chicago?

        • CubFan Paul

          I knew this question would be too tough.

      • anonymous-ly

        FYI, the small market strategy of lose to win has failed miserably and left bloody tracks for many teams. On the flip side, the big market strategy of gathering and buying assets has won far, far more Championships.

        I’m just in the camp that you can draft and develop your farm and build up the main club at the same time. If we can’t, then why is Theo such a genius (and paying him the highest executive salary in baseball)? Any number of thousands of cheap labor Ivy league school grads can trade away their best players and design a team to lose and draft the BPA.

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

          I sort of agree with the ,”Any number of thousands of cheap labor Ivy league school grads can trade away their best players and design a team to lose and draft the BPA.” (They aren’t cheap —from an AAS standpoint. They know their value…and won’t take less than it.)

          We have a team run by an investment banker/trader. To him/them, it’s all about buy-low, sell-high, mitigate downside risk, small, min. risk investments and highly leveraged assets for ROI to the private stockholders. Without their books, no one can tell if they are ‘winning the game’…the money game that is.

          AND believe me, I am no Theo apologist. I am a Theo realist. He’s just doing his master’s bidding. Middle Mgmt.

          • anonymous-ly

            “at this point, the “secret sauce” of high revenue teams run by a saber-leaning GM aren’t so secret any more. Theo Epstein isn’t the only guy in baseball who is going to suggest that the Cubs pour a lot of money into player development.

            In fact, at this point, I’d argue that the individual ideas that any GM candidate can offer are now probably so similar that they aren’t worth paying that much for. Smart, analytical baseball executives have essentially become commoditized – there are a few thousand Ivy-league graduates willing to work for peanuts and cracker jacks pounding on these team’s doors every year, and there is a seemingly never-ending supply of wiz kids attempting to climb the ladders of Major League front offices.”

            http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/what-is-theo-epstein-worth/>

            Ivy League grads will work cheap to get a chance at an executive job in baseball, Most work for free as interns to get a chance. Personally, I think Theo is worth it because of his experience, but not because he has some magical secrets or insights that other GM’s don’t have.

            • DocPeterWimsey

              Well, eventually there really is a limit to how much new we can learn about how teams actually win and lose games. Most of the obvious correlations have been found. “New” correlations are explaining increasingly small amounts of variation in wins and loses. Sure, there are still a few holdouts: but they are becoming scarcer, and they also are not the teams about which you usually have to worry.

              What might be the “new” frontier is working out correlations between amateur stats and low minor league stats, and how guys do in the upper levels. That will be particularly true for pitchers: people already do a pretty good job with position players, given the strong correlations between how productive guys are in MLB and where they were drafted for position players.

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

              I understand that. I’ve know that “secret sauce” is also passe. Leaning out the process is a matter of which organization you look at….GMs/Presidents are paid for their experience with baseball operations across a spectrum of considerations: marketing, tv deals, renovations, PR, team analysis, financial performance, all the business anal, et. al.

              Those eager IVY-tards work cheaply for the spell it takes them to build a resume up. Then they shop it to who will take notice of it for the best dollar, assuming they don’t get sidetracked along the way, as HUMAN beings tend to do.

              And working in any field requires some OJT and since the Cubs added a crapload of business analytic people, they are certainly paying something, at least a livable wage, for that privilege. But yes, there is nothing uniquely special about what is being done.

              Marginal gains only at this point on most of the batting and pitching area. Fielding is getting pretty close to a set model for predictive performance.

              Really does it matter what they (FG) or you, or I, think Theo is worth? Tom Ricketts chose him…I didn’t. You didn’t.

              Lastly, advancement is plausible in better scouting techniques & models, injury ID (before it can happen), bio-mechanics, psychological testing, integrating Virtual Reality with all fielding, pitching, and hitting areas, to get players more repetitions without undue forces-impacts to their health in off season preparation, and dynamic measures of all their bodies’ reactions, could be leverage more.

              That’s my spitballing at the moment…but sure all here can do better.

              THERE ARE TWO THINGS at work: a business and fan model: The one is about money first, the other the winning. THEY tie together, mistake me not, I’d did a very thorough presentation of this…
              http://www.docstoc.com/docs/164398513/A-presentation-of-basic-MLB-knowledge-on-franchises

              It is all Big DATA at the heart. Download…forget the Houston Astro books, I culled that together best I could from Bloomberg, et. al.

              Thanks!

        • Clyder

          It is Theo’s blueprint that won this year even though he was gone. Look at his drafting, signing & free agent success. Look at each roster of the Red Sox every year since they won their first world series up thru this year and you will see a franchise Theo put together.

          • Kyle

            Theo’s not using the same blueprint in Chicago that he did in Boston.

            • nkiacc13

              Yeah Theo cant use the same blueprint because of the difference in cba’s

              • aaronb

                That and half the financial resources he had in Boston.

                • Koyie Hill Sucks

                  That and the dodgers bailed them out by taking carl crawford and adrian gonzalez off their hands…

    • Kramden

      Calling Shark the Cubs’ top pitcher is like calling a Ford Focus a top of the line luxury car.

      Somehow it all just doesn’t matter and if anyone thinks otherwise, they just don’t get it and likely never will.

      • Blackhawks1963

        Bingo.

        • Ivy Walls

          hear here

  • Troy

    If we trade him who takes over as the team leader in Peripherals?

    • DarthHater

      E Jax :-P

  • CubsFanSaxMan

    Say goodbye Shark.

  • Lou Brown

    If the rumored package of 3 to 4 prospects, including some high ceiling ones is true, It sounds good to me. Even if one of the four develops, I will take six years of control starting in a year or two, versus two years starting now. Spellcheck has been frustrating: ace stuff, number three results.

    • Assman22

      Blue Jays package is similar to the Garza return…quantity over quality…wrong route to take when trading blue chippers imo…Dbacks won’t meet Cubs’ demands…

      • CubFan Paul

        “Dbacks won’t meet Cubs’ demands…”

        Bradley and Matt Davidson?

        • Assman22

          Bradley+++ for Shark+…Dbacks aren’t desperate enough to land that…Blue Jays seem to be a smoke screen to push Dbacks and/or Shark…Cubs were not big on Stroman in the draft FWIW…don’t see a deal happening soon…

          • Cyranojoe

            The Assman hath spoken. And it sounds way plausible, as usual.

          • http://bleachernation.com someday…2015?

            Any idea if Owings/Skaggs was part of the +++?

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

              Naw, they’re shopping Gregorious, Towers seems to have fallen in love with Owings.

  • ssckelley

    Am I about the only one still hoping for a miracle and he gets signed to an extension? About the only way this makes any sense is if they are looking to save the money they would spend on Samardzija to spend on Tanaka. Mid to TOR arms costs a lot of money to acquire out on the open market and signing Samardzija 5 for 72 million would be cheap.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      Would Samardzija take that offer? Reports are that he wants to test free agency. If that’s the case, and I have no reason to doubt it, then he’ll test free agency.

      Given the rate at which pitching contracts are escalating, I can easily understand him wanting to test free agency. He’ll likely be the top pitcher available the year he comes free, I suspect that will allow him to command a price tag far in excess of what extension he could sign now.

      • Clyder

        Spellcheck is NOT an ace or #1 starter! He may get big money as a free agent but just because he has a few games where he looks great doesn’t make him a #1, he is a #3 maybe a #2 on a contending team, but he is very inconsistent. Take the prospects & continue to become a perennial winner targeting 2015 & beyond.

      • ssckelley

        Luke, I work in sales and when I hear someone say they want to shop around all that means is they are looking for a better deal. Samardzija has a number and it should not be to hard to find out what it is, even if it is ridiculously high. On the open market he would easily be worth 20-25 million per year, but he isn’t and he has 2 years to keep proving his worth and hope he does not get hurt. There has to be a way to meet somewhere in the middle.

        • Pat

          What league average pitcher, ERA+ of 97 – 103, has gotten 20 – 25 million? I think you are severely overestimating Shark’s worth.

    • MightyBear

      Rumor has it he wants 5/90. Would you do that?

      • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

        Without a no-trade clause and with a clause that allows either party to opt out after three years, sure!

        • MightyBear

          Shark won’t go for that and won’t he have 10/5 rights before then?

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

            He might take the opt out – history says that would be more lucrative for him than risky – but I suspect the NTC would be a deal breaker.

            2018 will be year 10 for him, I think.

        • Kyle

          The opt-outs make it functionally a three-year deal, which he has little incentive to sign.

      • ssckelley

        I think the Cubs could get close, if his value is between 20-25 million then structure the deal like this:

        Year 1 – 11 million
        Year 2 – 14 million
        Year 3 – 20 million
        Year 4 – 22.5 million
        Year 5 – 22.5 million

        He ends up with exactly what he wants, the Cubs payroll does not take a big hit until some of the prospects start coming up (who are cheap to pay), and the Cubs can avoid having to “buy” a pitcher when they are looking to win.

        So short answer to your question is, yes I would give him 5/90.

        • Rebuilding

          I said it below, but the first 2 years are essentially meaningless for the Cubs. So in essence they are paying him $90 million for the 3 years they think they might compete

          • ssckelley

            Your math is off, without an extension he will still make about 12-15 million the next 2 years.

            • Rebuilding

              No. That’s my whole point. If you don’t trade him then you would be paying him $90 million for only 3 years of usefulness. If you trade him you don’t pay those two years of non-competitiveness

              • ssckelley

                That makes sense, and that is the difference, I still think the Cubs can be competitive this upcoming season. Obviously the starting rotation over the next 2 years will look much better with Samardzija than without him.

                But I can see where you are coming from.

    • TulaneCubs

      It’s actually the other way around.

      Given the Cubs timeline, the only way it makes sense not to trade Jeff Samardzija is for them to get a substantial discount on his deal. Like, an enormous discount.

      Doesn’t seem like he’s interested in that and that’s why it’s likely he’s traded.

    • Voice of Reason

      I used to want to see him sign an extension cause I do like hin, but I also understand that he is no more than a solid #3.

      His value is sky high. Take the large packag of prospects and keep building the farm system.

    • TOOT

      He is is NOT a number 1 starter, now how, no way! He’s trying to get in with the #1 ripoff artist that’s for sure. Think about this for a second. We have one of the best front office’s, if not the best, and they are unwilling to come to terms with Samardzijas demands?

  • Bret Epic

    Any word from Assman pertaining to the Samardzija rumors? I know he’s usually pretty ahead of the curve.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      I think a few days ago he referred to the talks with Toronto as preliminary (‘more smoke than fire’ was roughly his phrasing).

      And I think it was yesterday he was dropping hints about Washington and Giolito, although I don’t think he ever put a specific package out there. The readers assumed he meant Giolito+Cole, but I don’t think that was ever specifically mentioned.

      As regards Arizona, I don’t think he’s said much more than that conversations have taken place and that the D-backs like Junior Lake.

      • Bret Epic

        Hmm…that’d be an interesting package. Maybe we could get a decent haul from Arizona if we packaged say Samardzija, Junior Lake and Darwin Barney. Barney might not be great offensively, but he can play 2nd and SS and Arizona doesn’t have an impressive SS currently and Aaron Hill only played about half the season last year. Wouldn’t be a terrible package in my opinion.

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

          They have Chris Owings, who didn’t crap the bed at 2B/SS in his callup, and Didi Gregorious, who also hit better than Barney and is also much younger. They probably don’t need a 2B with weak contact skills on fastballs and sliders, his glove skills aside.
          http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/o/owingch01.shtml

          Lake is plausible, however.

        • Ivy Walls

          Epstein and the theory of more, more as in stable master more. Trading Samardz, makes sense, he is at the top of his trade value, Cubs still need more stable in the pitching ranks.

          He wants the club to have a Big 4 or 5 on the mound and in the field and more in the pipeline.

  • waffle

    if in fact the cubs are exploring trading spellcheck, I expect it to happen, and i expect some team to “blink” and overpay for him.

    He’s sexy. Not alot of innings. Theoretically still with upside. Has a live arm. Still coachable. Someone is going to say ” we can make it work…trust me” and overpay

    • Mike F

      The fact so many of you are missing is he is working. Which is exactly why he has such value. Castro on the other hand is something of project and isn’t working. He is a manager killer. I don’t have an issue with trading Jeff if you get good value and none of you should have any issue with trading Castro. Too many of you are completely inconsistent, you lust to rebuild to rebuild except where your pets clearly don’t fit but remain pets……

      • Professor Snarks

        Let’s see:

        Castro 23 year old with two all-star game appearances, with three years showing a plus hit tool.

        Shark 29 year old pitcher with two years of #3 starter results.

        Not even close. Especially for a team that may not compete until 2016/2017.

        • Mike F

          Let’s see, Castro failed miserably and Jeff ate up innings and has a low mileage arm. Castro has been in the majors 4 years and his performance is declining with time. He is a rehab project. You make my point…. Basic dishonesty here, several days ago you were arguing no one was suggesting Castro was HOFer type when the guy above had just written the same. Be honest, you aren’t a Jeff apologist but are a Starlin Castro apologist.

          • Professor Snarks

            Please show me what I said about Castro, or Shark, that was dishonest.

            Being no one’s ‘apologist’, I will admit to believing Castro will have more value to the Cubs when they contend than Shark will. I also KNOW that Castro can’t leave via free agency in two years like Shark can.

            Again, there is NO comparison in value between the two.

            • Mike F

              Well we agree on one thing there is no comparison in value. Jeff is more valuable except those who want to deny where he is as player.

              • Professor Snarks

                Again, you said I was dishonest. About what?

                By the way, in his two years as a starter, Jeff WAR value was 1.6 and 1.0. According to FanGraphs that is in the role player category. Barely above the scrub category.

                • Mike F

                  You are an apologist and let’s go back to our discussion of Castro on the 24th. Jeff above on the conversation reintroduces the idea that Castro is a future HOFer and a doofus at times. The concept of HOFer was a popular one in 2012 in fact many called him the equal of Jeter and were arguing he would be better after Theo alluded to the young Jeter thing.

                  So Jeff argues and throws in the HOFer on the 24th and I said something about it to which you denied what was up two posters above. You clearly missed it or refused to accept someone has said it. Be honest about Castro you are a fan we won’t call it apologist if you don’t want but be honest. And in your opinion he is better than Jeff. Jeff has a great arm. And I will coin the other term from Jeff on the 24th and just say I am not a fan of Castro who is a guy with talent and a big doofus who they want to rework his mental approach.

          • DocPeterWimsey

            Castro’s performance has not been in decline: he had a bad year last year due to an attempt to do something hitherto not done. That didn’t work. (His numbers prior to that were almost absurdly consistent, with his month-to-month stats exactly matching the expected distribution for a 0.300 hitter.)

            Now, what Castro has not done is improve the one facet of his game that could really improve: hitting for power. That has been a bit disappointing.

            • TOOT

              “Castro’s performance has not been in decline: he had a bad year last year due to an attempt to do something hitherto not done”

              Whoa Doc! I usually agree with you but you must reconsider here. How do you know his bad year came about by an attempt to alter something. Nobody knows this at this point. My personal observation is he went into decline(yes I’m going there) when the rape charges were levied against him. The numbers show it. Not saying he was guilty, but lok at the numbers since.

              • Mike F

                It has been in decline and it is a straight line from 2011 until know if you look at Fangraphs. He is in decline, where it goes in the future is anybody’s guess. But it appears obvious they will try once again his approach at the plate……

                • Rebuilding

                  His OPS:

                  2010: 755
                  2011: 773
                  2012: 753
                  2013: 631

                  His 2012 wasn’t a “straight line decline”. It could just be random variation of his skill set

                  • hansman

                    Even his 2012 wasn’t too bad he had a June/July slump and was really good before and after that.

                    I postulated prior to 2012 that Castro’s skill set would go through periods of bad hitting (a low walk rate will do that to you) and 2013 may have been just that combined with instruction counter to his talent. It sounds like they will keep trying to tweak his approach in 2014 so hopefully a different voice will hrlp

                    • Mike F

                      The trend line from 2012 and 2013 are straight down and that correlates directly to what they are asking him to do. The put him in the lead off role simply because pitchers would throw more strikes and it helped some. That was after his horrific year and he still only hit 269 in those 40 plus games. His flaws are even more problematic as there is tremendous weakness in the people around him. His best years came with much better talent around him and his promo from AA with no AAA before he was a finished product.

                      Major league pitching has adjusted to him and the results combined with the approach and talent around him aren’t good. If he went to a team with better talent, he will generally float up and probably resemble the first two years as long as the team doesn’t overwhelm him with too much thought. Castro is obviously not a thinking player. With the Cubs, I think the insistence on tinkering will be disastrous.

                    • hansman

                      2 years worth of data makes it pretty hard to draw a trend line that tells you anything worth a damn.

                      They put him in the leadoff role to maximize the number of PA he would get the rest of the year.

                      Please show me a study that highlights that a certain spot in the lineup or a more potent hitter behind the current batter impacts the way a pitcher attacks a batter.

  • anonymous-ly

    Samardzia is making the correct play by not signing an extension. By the time he reaches free agency, he will get a Greinke like contract that will take him into near retirement age 36 or 37. All he has to do is take some of his current arbitration money and invest it into insurance against injury to offset some of the risks.

  • jeff sorensen

    I have a feeling Toronto’s GM is feeling some of the pressure of his supposed genius, and might make a trade for Shark that Cubs fan would like a lot. Just a feeling.

  • Crazyhorse

    Cant really give a positive or negative feedback until a trade happens. if the package is good and filled with a blue chip prospect that can help in the near future great. if its for a roll of toliet paper that might be ready in 2 to 3 years . well let the laughter begin

  • Rebuilding

    I look at it like this.

    (1) We have Samardzija for 2014 and 2015. In 2014 he only helps the Cubs get a worse draft position and in 2015 that is very likely the case as well.

    (2) The FO has a number for an extension and from what it is rumored Samardzija wants it is likely those two numbers aren’t close enough that “negotiation” is going to bridge the gap.
    I also think this is true because my reading is that Shark thinks he is a top of the rotation starter, but there is no way that an analytically based FO can look at the numbers and think that.

    (3) Even if you give JS the benefit of the doubt and project him as a 3 WAR pitcher (a feat has yet to accomplish) over 5 years that $75 million. But for the Cubs the first two years are meaningless. As a matter of fact they possibly hurt the long term goals. So you are paying $75 million for the last 3 years when you hope to compete. And that’s assuming he doesn’t lose 2 MPH off his fastball when he’s 33. How good is Shark going to be when he’s only throwing 94-95?

    (4) So the Cubs can either hold on for two meaningless years and get nothing, overpay him for 5 years when you really only need him for 3 or trade him and get something valuable for when you want to compete.

    (5) I know this final point will get poo-poo’ed because it rarely happens, but if Samardzija is determined to go to free agency after 2015 then that matches up with our competitive window and given our likely payroll then we would have just as good a chance to sign him as anyone

  • Rizzo1684

    I have a gut feeling that Shark s going to be traded to Arizona for Tyler Skaggs, David Holmberg, and Adam Eaton. We will also give Arizona Junior Lake and another low level prospect. Who wins this deal? Serious question and please just don’t say something like “dumb” I think it would actually be a smart move for Arizona since they could have a lineup of Parra, Prado, Ross,Goldy, Davidson, owings, lake,montero. The Cubs could have a lineup of Eaton,Sweeney,rizzo,schierholtz,Castillo,olt,Castro,Barney. I have no insider info I’m just your avg cubs fan trying to think of a deal.

    • Rebuilding

      Funny, that is the exact deal I think is going to happen, except I think us including Lake also gets us Stryker Trahan.

      I think over time it is a win for us. Eaton is a guy who can play center, bats lefthanded and projects to have a 380 OBP. I think by 2015 Skaggs will be every bit as good as Shark and is a lefty. I think Holmberg will be a nice lefty out of the pen. And Trahan is sort of the Vogelbach of catching prospects people don’t like his look back there but he has a hell of a bat.

      • Rebuilding

        I honestly would be overjoyed with that deal. But full disclosure – I think Eaton is going to be one of the best lead off men in the league for a long time

        • Kyle

          The average MLB LFer put up a .719 OPS last season, and the average RFer was at .743.

          This isn’t 2004 anymore. Offense is way down. A .750 OPS is useful everywhere.

          • Rebuilding

            So he was slightly above mediocre and looked a bit lost on defense. He also had an absurd platoon split that makes him only useful against lefties. And you think Lake is going to put up a 750 OPS next year? He was helped by a hot start. After a winter of looking at scouting reports do you think Lake is going to see any fastballs next year?

            • Rebuilding

              In other words he’s a guy who can only hit lefties, plays the corner outfield poorly and can’t play anywhere else and cooled off after 1 time through the league. Sounds like the definition of a spare part

              • Bill

                I didn’t see Eaton exactly light the world on fire during his callup. Small sample size for both, but Lake’s numbers were better.

                • Rebuilding

                  Eaton had a bad arm injury to start the season last year and started slowly. His career minor league slash line through 1300 at bats was 348/450/501. That’s a 450 OBP which is the highest OBP for a minor leaguer with over 500 at bats going back to at least 1950. He and Lake aren’t on the same planet as far as hitting goes

                  • Bill

                    Great. So, he kills minor league pitching but can’t hit major league pitching. Sounds just like what the Cubs need.

                    • Rebuilding

                      LOL. Minor league stats have been shown to predict major league stats with great correlation. If you don’t believe in that then you don’t believe in anything this front office does

      • Mike F

        Bad comparison, don’t think Skaggs has same kind of power arm, sorry I don’t see the facts backing you up there. They want Bradley.

        • CubFan Paul

          Very bad comparison. Skaggs is a soft tosser all the way.

          We don’t need another Travis Wood in the rotation. It’s Bradley or bust with Arizona & they know it.

          • Rebuilding

            Tyler Skaggs is not a “soft-tosser”. Before last year he was comfortably mid-90s which is why he was the #10 prospect in baseball. The diamondbacks believe he started doing something different mechanically last year that they identified on tape. Here is an article about it: http://www.azcentral.com/sports/diamondbacks/articles/20130921arizona-diamondbacks-pitcher-tyler-skaggs-takes-off-all-month-unwind.html

            • CubFan Paul

              “before last year” implies/means not now.

              Averaging less than 90mph *right now* implies/means soft tosser.

              • Rebuilding

                Ummmm, not really. Soft tosser implies that’s all he’s capable of and is reliant on his breaking/off speed stuff. He’s been throwing mid 90s since high school and has always been known as a power pitcher. That’s why the drop last year was a head scratcher

                • Rebuilding

                  By your definition David Price is a “soft tosser” because his velocity dropped last year. That’s not his game. If it would have continued he would have been called “done for”.

                  • CubFan Paul

                    Price averaged more than 93mph last year

                  • Jason P

                    Skaggs fastball was 89 last year. Price’s was still 93. Big difference. You can’t convince me that a slight mechanics change will increase his fastball velocity by 5 mph.

                    • Rebuilding

                      Price was around 90-91 in April in May last year when he was getting knocked around. Then he got back up to 95-96 by season’s end. Skaggs consistently threw 94-96 all through the minors – I’ll pull scouting reports if you want me to. You can question whether he had an injury, but there isn’t a scout in the world that would say Skaggs is a soft-tosser

                    • Jason P

                      I just did a quick google search and the first scouting report I pulled up say he touches 94 but sits 89-91.

                      http://baseballprospectnation.com/2012/11/29/scouting-report-tyler-skaggs-lhp/

                • TOOT

                  Can we PLEASE get Greg Maddux back in some sort of capacity with the organazation already. I don’t care how much we pay. He would be worth the cost. Hell, how much have we spent on the FO already. Start talking to the dude!

          • jsorensen

            It’ll be bust then because Bradley won’t be traded.

      • jsorensen

        I like most of what you said but I’m not sold on Trahan. He really improved his caught stealing % but he makes a lot of errors & his obp. dropped from .422 to .328 as he moved from AZ league to SS rookie. 19 year old catchers are scary prospects.

        • Rebuilding

          A lot of people don’t think he’ll stick at catcher. But some scouts thought he had one of the Top 5 bats in the draft 2 years ago

    • Diamond Don

      Cubs would be short changed in this deal. Shark and lower prospect for the three Arizona players makes more sense. Lake should not be a throw-in. If you include Lake, Archie Bradley has to coming back our way.

      • Rebuilding

        Lake is destined to be a utility guy. He doesn’t have a position he plays well and a 750 OPS is nothing at a corner outfield spot

        • http://Bleachernation Lou Brock

          Arizona was rumored to be interested in Schierholtz for quite awhile. I think a Samardzija, Scierholtz, and Vitters will get you Skaggs, Holmberg, Eaton, Trahan, and Pennington.
          Then take Castro and B. Jackson and move them to Mets for Syndergaard, Murphy, and Plawicki .

          • Rizzovoir Dog

            Samardzija and Lake for Skaggs, Delgado and Eaton works for me.

      • jeff sorensen

        That’s crazy talk. Lake being included means Bradley? No way. They view Bradley as their future stud #1, can’t miss.

        • BenRoethig

          Then they can wait 2-3 years for him. Skaggs is basically Travis Wood. Potential 2 on a mediocre team, 3 on a good team, 4 on a playoff team. If that’s the best we can get, just pay shark the money.

    • jsorensen

      I think that deal is close to what could happen. I’m hoping that if a Shark to D’backs trade happens it’s more like this: Shark, Lake, Russell for Tyler Skaggs, Randall Delgado, David Holmberg, and Andrew Chafin. 3 lefties. If this much pitching was even possible, Schierholtz could go in the deal as well. I really think the Cubs FO wants Delgado by the way. Obviously Bradley is the D’backs top prospect, but I think Delgado is on the Cubs big time want list.

      • Bill

        “but I think Delgado is on the Cubs big time want list.”

        Why?

        • jsorensen

          It’s just my opinion, but I think because he’s very possibly going to be a solid major league starter, probably a solid #3 type, has great control & command, and they wanted him from the Braves before in the failed Dempster deal. But again, it’s just my opinion.

          • Bill

            He had great control last year in Az, but his BB/9 were much lower than his career numbers, so I wouldn’t expect a repeat of that performance.

            BTW, I’m not saying Delgado isn’t good, but I’d be real disappointed if he was a major piece in a Shark trade. His minor league numbers don’t scream number 3 starter to me, but who knows.

        • Rebuilding

          Well, they had a trade worked out with Atlanta for him until Dempster spiked it so they obviously like him

          • Bill

            As the return for a 2 month rental.

            • Rebuilding

              Just replying as to a reason they might want him. I’m not a big fan of Delgado’s personally

              • Kramden

                I have Shark, Russell and Vogelbach going to Toronto for Sanchez and Stroman.

              • DocPeterWimsey

                Whether you want to socialize with a guy should be zero basis for whether you want him on a sports team.

  • Voice of Reason

    If Dave Kaplan says he is 99% traded look for the odds of him staying to actually be 99%.

    Kaplan is such a boob. I have zero respect for his credibility.

  • Carew

    Tom Loxas retweeted WorldSeriesDreaming that there could be a third team. I dunno how reliable both are though

  • YourResidentJag

    Nick Cafardo
    ‏@nickcafardo
    The Cubs are going to keep trying to sign Jeff Samardzija long term even amid the trade rumors according to a major league source

  • bill jean

    Tom Loxas is saying Arizona wants a 3 team deal in a samardzija trade. The shark to Arizona, Arizona sending a prospect to the Cubs and the shortstop to the third team, and the third team sending their prospects to the Cubs

    • bill jean

      If there is another team involved the Arizona pitching prospect probably isn’t Bradley (bummer), probably a lesser pitcher, maybe Skaggs or Delgado

      • bill jean

        Brett,

        moderation?

      • bill jean

        TomLoxas @TomLoxas
        Follow
        #DBacks trying to win Samardzija sweepstakes by entering 3rd team.
        7:42 PM – 27 Nov 2013

      • bill jean

        If there is another team involved the Arizona pitching prospect probably isn’t Bradley (bummer), probably a lesser pitcher, maybe Skaggs or Delgado

        • jsorensen

          Here’s a thought: saw the Mets were looking for a SS, also seeing talk about Arizona trying to get a 3rd team in on the Shark trade, so what about something like this: Cubs send Shark to Arizona, Mets send Noah Snydergaard (or Wheeler) to Cubs, Arizona sends Chris Owings to Mets. Obviously this would have to be expanded, like Cubs get another pitcher from Arizona (like Delgado or Skaggs, maybe a Trahan or a Spruill as well), Cubs send Lake to Arizona. Arizona sends Eaton to NY. Crazy but fun to dream up.

  • TOOT

    I really don’t understand what Samardizja’s problem is. Does he really think he is “all that”. Sure hasn’t shown it. At this point nobody considers him front rotation material. Sign a ub friendly extension dummy, and go from there.

  • Blackhawks1963

    Maybe…

    D’Backs get Jeff Samardzija
    Mets get Didi Gregarious
    Cubs get Tyler Scaggs and a solid pitching prospect from the Mets (but no way can I see NY giving up Dan Wheeler or Noah Syngaard)

  • SenorGato

    I just noticed Hoyer said this this week:

    “I think that the only things that have really slowed us down, slowed down our progress, is some of the rules changes that were put in place I think have made free agency harder to build in because there are fewer good players now.”

    I take this as a good thing. Still haven’t bought into the crying poor thing.

    • TOOT

      What chu sayin, again?

    • TOOT

      ” Still haven’t bought into the crying poor thing.”

      Don’t get it.

  • Pingback: The Predictable Response to Yesterday’s Trade Samardzija Mania? More Extension Talks | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary

  • Antonio

    What would you think of this 3 team trade:

    D’backs get: RHP Jeff Samardzija, RHP Kyle Hendricks, OF/3B/SS Junior Lake, OF Nate Schierholtz (Cubs) and OF Brandon Nimmo (Mets).

    Mets get: SS Starlin Castro (Cubs), LHP Tyler Skaggs and OF Adam Eaton (D’backs).

    Cubs get: RHP Archie Bradley, LHP David Holmberg, C Stryker Trahan (D’backs), RHP Noah Sydengaard, RHP Rafael Montero and C/1B Kevin Plawecki (Mets).

    I think the three teams would be addresing some of their needs, and it would certainly give great pitching and catching depth (and quality) to the Cubs.

    • Antonio

      *Noah Syndergaard, sorry I mispelled his name.

  • Pingback: The Asking Price for Jeff Samardzija Has Indeed Been as Lofty as it Should Be | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary

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+