burning stoveAccording to multiple reports, which are feeding off of and adding to an ongoing negotiation involving the Angels and Diamondbacks, those two teams are looping in the White Sox to help make a Mark Trumbo deal happen.

The Diamondbacks reportedly are deeply interested in bringing the slugging (but little else) young righty in, but apparently have had trouble finding a perfect fit in a two-way deal with the Angels. Some reports had a Tyler Skaggs/Trevor Cahill package on the table, but it’s fair to wonder whether the Angels – who are pushing the luxury tax cap – prefer not to take on Cahill’s salary, even if they want a pitcher like him.

Enter the White Sox with Hector Santiago, whom they would be swapping out for Adam Eaton from the Diamondbacks (such a White Sox trade, and I mean that complimentarily).

There are obviously considerable implications here for the Cubs/Samardzija/Diamondbacks situation, so we’ll keep an eye on it.

UPDATE: Nick Piecoro adds that, if it’s true that the D-backs are giving up Skaggs and Eaton, they’ll be getting more than just Trumbo.

UPDATE 2 (12:20pm CT): Bruce Levine and Bob Nightengale suggest all sides feel pretty confident that a deal is going to go down.

UPDATE 3 (12:40pm CT): From the LA said, Alden Gonzalez reports that although the deal isn’t “imminent,” a source says it’s “getting pretty close.” Mincing words a bit there, but the point is, more support that the deal will go down.

UPDATE 4 (1:23pm CT): Jon Morosi says Santiago is indeed in the deal, and it’s close to being completed.

UPDATE 5 (2:10pm CT): Multiple reports say it’s a done deal, with Trumbo going to the Diamondbacks, Santiago and Skaggs going to the Angels, and Eaton going to the White Sox. The Diamondbacks are also getting a couple PTBNLs, which appear to be one each from the Angels and White Sox. I don’t like this deal for the Diamondbacks. Obviously it depends on the PTBNLs, but, given the time of year, they probably aren’t big-timers – instead, they’re probably coming from a list of Rule 5 eligibles, and the teams are simply waiting for the Rule 5 Draft to occur on Thursday to make sure the player(s) isn’t/aren’t selected.

The Diamondbacks get a bruiser bat who will be a rough left fielder and won’t get on base (though he’s going to hit a lot of homers there in Arizona), but they give up a top 50 caliber pitching prospect and a center fielder with breakout potential. Those pieces, if I can say it without sounding hopelessly biased, would have been better used in a deal for Jeff Samardzija (together with an additional piece or two). But, hey, who knows? Maybe the Diamondbacks tried that approach, and the Cubs were keep the price too high.

The Angels get a couple cheap arms under control for a long time, and look like winners in this deal, even if you don’t love Santiago (and I don’t). The White Sox also look like winners, converting Santiago into Eaton. Eaton cult hero status: soon.

The fallout here will be interesting to watch. The Diamondbacks are out of the outfield market now (so no Shin-Soo Choo or Nate Schierholtz), but might be even more interested in picking up an arm. Trumbo won’t cost them as much as a Choo, so maybe they can afford a free agent arm if they’re so inclined. Grabbing Samardzija without giving up Archie Bradley just got a lot tougher, and I don’t see a deal with Arizona happening now. Hell, maybe they go all out and get David Price with a Bradley package.

The Angels got their arms, so they’re done on pitching for the offseason, I’d think. They reportedly wanted Samardzija, but there was never a fit there.

The outfield market is shaken up, since the Diamondbacks get their outfielder without dipping into free agency. Maybe prices on the Cruz/Choo contingent drop slightly, but probably not enough to get the Cubs involved.

  • Mike Lillard

    Am I missing something here? Any and all rumors for the Cub’s involve pitching only??? Our lineup was terrible last year! We need some protection for Rizzo and a leadoff hitter. Are we throwing the same group out there and expect a difference from last year? Yes maybe Castro is better than he showed, but that is one guy and he is no clue what he is doing right now in the box. Valbuena, Barney, Sweeney, wow that’s impressive! Let’s face it, hitting and scoring runs will bring at least a little excitment in the air plus fill more seats/sell more beer. Signing or trading for past their prime relievers, backup cathers and fifth outfielders means another season of pure boredom and a another top 3 draft pick…

    • Soda Popinski

      Yeah, our lineup was (and looks to be again) pretty bad. The reason we’re looking for arms is because help is on the way from within on the offensive side. Our best several prospects are position players. But that’s not to say we shouldn’t add a decent bat this offseason if the price is right.

      • Brains

        you can never fault a FO for looking for pitching, i agree. it’s the most difficult thing to find and sustain due to injuries. but some of the trades going down today are pretty indicative of what i’ve been saying about Jed’s inability to make lemonade. he’s a weak link and he doesn’t seem to be respected by other GMs. or at least he’s not requisitely free to be creative, or aggressive enough, etc. but it’s been C- work with a few bright spots. a team as much in need as us needs a few surprise deals that benefit the team. and now.

        • terencemann

          Please find me 10 GMs who have done more to improve their franchise over the last 2 seasons than Jed Hoyer. He’s added a ton of talent at the minor league level and a little at the major league level while shedding players with no future with the team. If “C-” means below average, than Hoyer is certainly not that.

          • terencemann
            • CubFan Paul

              “Also, lineup protection is a myth”

              You stat guys are hilarious.

              • DocPeterWimsey

                Well if it existed, then guys would hit better with protection, wouldn’t they? They don’t. So, how does that not falsify “protection” as a hypothesis?

                Here’s the key. What the stats guys did was take a lot of the beliefs of “old schoolers” and turn them into testable hypotheses. A lot of those hypotheses bellyflopped: the data do not look like what the hypotheses predict that they should. This is the same thing that happened to Alchemy, Astrology, etc.

                • Scotti

                  “This is the same thing that happened to Alchemy…”

                  You know, of course, that the Alchemists have been proven correct, yes? At the core of stars, lighter elements are turned into heavier elements and, ultimately in larger stars, base metals are turned into gold.

                  “The heaviest elements, like gold and uranium, were formed when stars many times more massive that our Sun detonated in supernova explosions.”


                  While real Alchemy was beyond the grasp of Alchemists they were 100% correct in their belief that you could change base metals into gold. In fact, ALL gold (and nearly everything on Earth) exists because of that process.

              • Eric

                Stupid stats guys and their stupid facts.

            • C. Steadman

              it exists even though results are actually small

              • DocPeterWimsey

                Even then, I seem to recall that you get the results only when statistics are “parametric”: that is, they look at deviations from expectations in some absolute terms (usually standard deviations from the mean). When “non-parameteric” statistics were used (i.e., those that look at ranked performances rather than absolute performances), the difference disappeared.

                In plain English, that means that it was about 50:50 as to whether guys did better or worse with “protection.” However, either the biggest positive deviations came when guys had “protection” or the biggest negative deviations came when guys had lost “protection.”

            • Voice of Reason

              Talk to any 8th place hitter in the National League. Ask how often he doesn’t see any pitches or is intentionally walked because the pitcher is next in the order.

              Line up protection certainly does help.

              • DocPeterWimsey

                The #8 NL hitter is a completely different story: he has a non-batter coming up. However, inserting different batters behind a slugger has little to no association with how well that batter does.

                (A lot of this came from the “old schoolers” putting carts before horses and assuming that sluggers took walks because pitchers were afraid of them, rather than understanding that having a good batting eye makes sluggers even more formidable. Guys like Trumbo and Franceour demonstrate that you can have a ton of power, and it doesn’t matter who bats behind you: pitchers will still throw pitches outside of the zone because they know you’ll swing and miss; guys like Miggy force pitchers to throw strikes by not swinging at pitches that are very close to the strike zone, and even some strikes that they don’t like.)

                • Voice of Reason

                  Your protection in the line up theory is off base. Simply saying that the #8 hitter is a completely different story doesn’t help back up your theory at all.

                  So, if an 8th place hitter in your line up is hitting .190 then the 7th place hitter shouldn’t expect to see poor pitches because the 8th place hitter can’t hit his way out of a paper bag?

                  Or, if the Cubs were to give Sosa a day off and plug in some bum to hit fourth in Sosa’s place, you don’t think that the pitcher would throw around the third place hitter knowing that the #4 hitter can’t hit at all?

                  Line up protection does matter. It’s not a theory at all.

                  • DocPeterWimsey

                    Basically, what the #8 hitter bats does not predict the performance of the #7 hitter. Or to put it more exactly, if the #7 hitter has a good #8 hitter behind in in 2012, and a bad #8 hitter behind him in 2013, then it’s basically 50:50 that he’ll have a better year in 2013 than he did in 2012.

                    (This assumes, of course, that the bad #8 hitter in 2013 isn’t a pitcher: guys like LaRussa often preferred to bat pitchers #8.)

                  • DocPeterWimsey

                    I should add that, fundamentally, the whole “protection” idea is based on people thinking about baseball from the perspective of batters and not pitchers. The assumption is that pitchers operate out of fear. They don’t. Pitchers work to get batters out. The pitches that get Miggy Cabrerra out are both relative few AND the same with Prince Fielder or Nick Castellanos batting behind him.

                    Similarly, the pitches that are going to get Rizzo out are the same regardless of who hits behind him. Most of the time when pitchers get burned, it’s not because they throw a fastball down the middle out of fear of walking the guy and setting up a 2-run homer: it’s because they simply miss with a breaking ball or fastball, and the pitch gets nailed.

                    Steve Stone used to (and still might) ridicule the whole “protection” notion as simply ignoring what pitcher are doing. It’s even more true now, when pitchers have heat charts on their iPhones showing them which strikes are most apt to get a batter out. And if those pitches are on the corner, then that’s where they will throw, regardless of who is on deck.

                    • Scotti

                      Pitchers do not “work to get batters out.” Pitchers work to allow as few runs as possible. Sometimes that means walking a guy intentionally (Bonds was walked intentionally over 100 times IN ONE SEASON). Sometimes that means pitching around a guy and then, in the same at bat, walking him intentionally. Sometimes that means just plain old pitching around a guy.

                      In GAME CRITICAL SITUATIONS, a pitcher will pitch around a good/great hitter to get to an average/poor hitter on a frequent basis. “Don’t let this guy beat you” isn’t a common phrase for no reason.

                • Scotti

                  “A lot of this came from the “old schoolers” putting carts before horses and assuming that sluggers took walks because pitchers were afraid of them, rather than understanding that having a good batting eye makes sluggers even more formidable.”

                  Very few guys without power draw large volumes of walks. Is this a genetic thing where little guys didn’t get the “good batting-eye” gene? Or is this just a case where pitchers will avoid pitching to guys in certain game situations UNLESS they feel they can get the hitter out (like bouncing some pitches to Franceour)?

            • Scotti

              You know of course that you merely linked a Google search and that some of those sites purport to SUPPORT protection.

              The top site in the search (Fangraphs) actually had verbiage like “I’m not going to say that Fielder didn’t have some effect on the way pitchers pitched to Cabrera” and “I’m open to the idea of Prince Fielder having an effect on the approach against Miguel Cabrera.” Here’s where he winds up “Gun to my head, I don’t think Prince Fielder actually had an effect on the way pitchers pitched to Miguel Cabrera.” Terms like “gun to my head” and “I think” seem to fall WELL short of the “Stat guys have disproved protection” claims.

          • CubFan Paul

            “Please find me 10 GMs who have done more to improve their franchise over the last 2 seasons than Jed Hoyer”

            That list would be longer than 10

          • Jon

            It’s not really hard to stock up a minor league system at the costs of depleting and tearing down your major league roster.

            • Bob A`1

              “Tearing down your major league roster” Explain that please. In 2011, the year before Hoyer took over, the Cubs won 71 games. At the end of the season as free agency kicked in they had no 1st baseman and nothing in the minors, DB at second, Castro at SS, No 3rd basemen with nothing in the minors. One outfielder (Soriano) with nothing in the minors. There rotation was a comedy. Sure they could have resigned Carlos Pena, Fukudome, Aram, Marlon Byrd. I just don’t understand how people thought the 2011 Cubs had a good roster or farm system.

              • Jon

                They have purposely tanked two(going on three) now to get a top 5 draft pick. They have sold off asset’s at the deadline to boost their farm system. They have cut payroll massively, down to 75 million this year.(barring a major FA signing coming up)

                I’m not disagreeing with the moves, but anyone can build a top 5 system at the expense of the major league roster. It’s a minimal accomplishment.

              • Edwin

                Baseball America had the Cubs farm system ranked 16th in 2011. Before the trade for Garza it was ranked 8th. 14th in 2012. Fangraphs had the 2012 Cubs ranked 22nd. To say that the Cubs had nothing no farm system before Theo took over is just plain wrong.

                • Bob A`1

                  At their positions of need they had nothing in the minors to take over in 2011/2012. They seriously did not have much in the way of trading chips in the minors. So at that point you’ve got free agency. Not a great way to fill 4-5 positions and half of a starting rotation with prime players. I just see that team as a train wreck at the end of 2011

          • Edwin

            It’s a pretty open ended question. How do you define “improving the franchise”? If it’s by MLB wins/talent, then the Cubs are terrible. Boston, Baltimore, KC, Oakland, Seattle, Washington, Cincy, Pitt, and LA Dodgers have all done more to improve their teams since 2011 than the Cubs have done. Even teams like the Yankees, Tigers, and Cardinals have done more at the MLB level to compete the last two years than the Cubs have done. Throw in Cleveland too.

            If it’s by farm system, then I guess you can be happy with the job the Cubs have done. They’re certainly turned their farm system around from a middle/lower half system into a top 5 system. Of course, they way they’ve done it has come at quite the cost, and they’re still a year or two away from knowing how much that losing has paid off.

          • Kyle

            “Please find me 10 GMs who have done more to improve their franchise over the last 2 seasons than Jed Hoyer”

            Dear lord, it’d be hard to find 10 who haven’t.

            • johnny chess Aka 2much2say

              Red Sox Blue Jays Angels Dodgers St Louis Cincy Wash Atlanta Tampa San Fran Baltimore Tigers Rangers KC to name a few teams with GM’s
              who have improved.

    • Ricky

      Hey Mike,

      I hate to burst your bubble, but I think that’s exactly what the Cubs want. We shouldn’t expect anything more than last year (maybe even less). There is no reason to spend money unless players drop their demands (as Brett mentions). The club isnt in a position to contend at this point, so spending money on big money FAs would be a wasted cost.

    • DocPeterWimsey

      I suspect that Jed & Theo have seen the stats showing that “protection” does not correlate with improved hitting, so I doubt that will be an issue.

      I do agree that they want a good leadoff hitter. However, for them, that will mean a guy with good OBP, regardless of whether he runs like Lou Brock or Lou Ferrigno. It’s possible (given gossip) that they were trying to get that out of AZ in Eaton (who runs more like the first Lou). It’s possible that is why they’ve been talking with Choo (who runs more like the second Lou). It looks like neither is going to happen because, well, there are 28 or 29 other teams involved!

  • oswego chris

    post PEDs(maybe) 25 homer guys hard to find…if I were an Angel fan I would have preferred a proven starter…of course Angels have huge, huge salary issues

  • Kyle

    Trumbo is like a fascinating case study in “how to be mediocre in value despite having nearly elite power”

    • DocPeterWimsey

      Swing and miss. Rinse. Repeat.

    • cub2014

      Baez will probably be a defensive version of Trumbo.

      • cub2014

        sorry i meant same type of hitter as trumbo but
        a good defender

  • Jon

    If all it took was Santiago to get Eaton, couldn’t the Cubs have got in on this?

    • Rebuilding

      I said the other day that I would trade Samardzija straight up for Eaton and then ducked. No need to go into pages debating everyone – it’s not going to happen anyway

    • terencemann

      The Diamondbacks are getting Mark Trumbo, who they’re in love with due to HR and ribbies so I don’t think they Cubs have that guy. They’re also getting a couple non-prospects as PTBNL.

  • Rebuilding

    Good lord. Skaggs and Eaton get moved…and it’s not to us. Too bad

    • Jon

      What sucks is that Kevin Towers is that rare GM just looking to get fleeced.

    • http://thenewenthusiast.com dw8

      Word from evaluators is that much of Skaggs prospect stock was tied up in velo projection that hasn’t yet been achieved. Back of the rotation guy if the velo never comes, I guess.

    • DarthHater

      “Skaggs and Eaton get moved…and it’s not to us. Whew!!!”


      • Rebuilding

        Ha. We’ll see when Adam Eaton makes you switch your allegiance to the Sox with his gritty play and high OBP

        • Jay

          Gritty play and OBP is a lot less valuable than a starter who is an easy #2 or #3 on most teams.

          • Rebuilding

            Said I wasn’t going to debate it again. If a guy puts up a 380 OBP, hits 40 doubles and plays average def in CF he is worth a #3 SP on most teams. But you prob don’t agree with that projection or that statement so let’s just move on given that’s it’s theoretical now

            • CubFan Paul

              “But you prob don’t agree with that projection”

              Where did you get that projection? It looks very generous.

              • Rebuilding

                This was Eaton’s career line in the minors through 2012 (The last time he had many at-bats in the minors). Yes, that is a 450 OBP:

                .348 .450 .501 = OPS .951 – He hit 47 doubles in 2012 between AA/AAA

                Last year in the majors he had a 382 OBP in limited at-bats. This year he had an arm injury

                • CubFan Paul

                  So that .380OBP and 40doubles is *your* projection.

                  • Rebuilding

                    Yep. That’s called the RPS. Rebuilding Projection System. I thought I was pretty clear that many might not agree with the projection or the statement. I personally think the Sox got an absolute steal

  • itzscott

    Kinda sucks seeing the Sox make a nice trade while the perception is that the Cubs are standing around doing their best Alfred E. Newman impressions.

  • Terry

    Not to be a broken record but I have been wanting the Cubs to get Trumbo for the last couple of years. I know he strikes out alot but we need some power to replace Soriano and I also hate it that the Sox got Eaton instead of us, while other teams are making trades and signing free agents all we do is pick up a few fringe players.

  • Rebuilding

    Santiago had an insanely high FIP to ERA differential last year. Should see a ton of regression

    • Rebuilding

      Although he had an even more insanely high differential in 2012. So who knows what mojo he’s got working (maybe the screwball does these things)

      • http://thenewenthusiast.com dw8

        Relief innings maybe buoying his ERA. Just a thought. Also Strand Rate looks high.

  • J.L.

    It may say something about the Diamondbacks philosophy or lack thereof that they were decided to add either a guy with huge OBP numbers and not much power or a guy who’s the exact opposite.

    • Andrew

      all teams should operate like that though. value is value whether its via obp or slugging. I think this trade is terrible for the dbacks but still, looking for players with opposite skillsets makes sense.

      • hansman

        Eh, a point of OBP is more valuable than a point of slugging.

  • BenW

    Actually thinks this deal makes the Dbacks more likely to trade for Jeff. Their payroll will be through the roof if they try to sign one of the big FA pitchers. Jeff is definitely more affordable for the next few seasons, and probably a better pitcher than anyone in FA.

    • Cub Lifer

      Except under no circumstances is Arizona going to trade Archie Bradley. And without Archie Bradley, there isn’t going to be a trade for Jeff Samardzija. The Shark to Arizona is dead. Which I’m fine with, becuase a package centered around Tyler Skaggs wasn’t going to be strong enough.

      • BenW

        Guessing you are right there. Not sure what route they will take, as I don’t see them spending 13-15 million on one of the FA starters like Garza. Price would cost more than Bradley, so it seems like they are limited.

  • Chuck

    I would take DiDi and Archie Bradley for Shark now :)

    • DocPeterWimsey

      I might take Gigi and Bradley for Shark….

  • Cub Lifer

    This was a great deal for the White Sox. Santiago is a nothing special back of rotation option. To convert Santiago into Adam Eaton is a job well done for Rick Hahn. Eaton is nothing fancy, but he gives that team a desperately needed defensive upgrade in the outfield plus a catalyst at the top of the lineup card.

    Skaggs? I read a lot of mixed opinions about his future. Seems like the hype exceeds the actual reality with him. Good young pitcher…no doubt about that. But he might be a #4 type starter at his peak.

    Trumbo? Steep price for Arizona to pay, but then again Kevin Towers in Jim Hendryesqe in his awfulness. Trumbo will be a liability in the Arizona outfield, but I guess so long as he provides lineup protection for Goldschmidt and cranks out 30 home runs they will be happy in the Valley of the Sun. Arizona is always going to be second tier to the Dodger and Giants until they shed Towers from that front office. Just my opinion.

  • Brother Tim

    Can someone kindly validate that Theo Epstein and Jed Hoyer traveled to the Winter Meetings? Did they get stuck in snow? Did the car break down on 1-75? Was the flight cancelled? Seriously, WTF are those two doing right now. I have expect to see a photo pop up on Facebook showing these two on the teacup ride at Disney.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      Given that there has been one major, and one minor move so far this week, I guess the GMs for 26 other teams didn’t go to Orlando either.

      • DocPeterWimsey

        What? There are only two teams: the Cubs and the Other team.

      • Jeff

        Brett, do you think someone like Schierholtz would be moved for a leadoff hitter? We need someone to hit leadoff, no one on the roster really fits the mold.

        I’m assuming DeAza is available now, so you could slide Sweeney over to RF.

        Unless Theo & Jed plan on tanking this year, so they don’t really care about scoring runs?

        • brickhouse

          Considering Castro for leadoff

        • Kyle

          Leadoff hitter is not a position, and no team ever needs one specifically.

          • Jeff

            I disagree, while it’s nice to have speed at the top of the order, I’ll take OBP over speed. The problem with this team and scoring runs is that the players in the line up have lousy OBP, specifically the first two hitters at the top.

            Everybody wants someone who hits 30HR’s but I’d rather have two hitters with +.350 OBP guys ahead of Castro & Rizzo.

            • Fishin Phil

              Yup. Campana was faster than hansman after a hamburger, but couldn’t get on base. OBP more important than speed. Of course if you can get both in one player, that is something else!

              • Jeff

                I agree with Todd Hollandsworth when he said if the Cubs could get one player this off season and money was no object, he would pick Jacoby Ellsbury. We need players like that, not Campana’s.

                We need to find some better OBP players

            • Kyle

              We definitely need OBP, regardless of where it bats in the order.

            • Andrew

              I dont see why you would want de Aza then. He has a career obp of .336, which isnt bad but certainly isnt great for a leadoff hitter.

              • Jeff

                He was only mentioned as an example of someone out there who might be expendable since there is no way in hell we are getting a Choo.

                He had a .400 and .349 OBP in 2011 & 2012. I agree that he struck out too much and his OBP wasn’t that great in 2013, but given our economic plight thanks to Mr. Ricketts and Mr. Zell, we are looking at the reclamation pile and wavier wire for players..lol

          • Chef Brian

            Wow Kyle. Did someone pee pee in your Cheerios this morning? I have watched you go up and down each board and put a one liner on many contributer’s thoughts. Are people speaking to you specifically or do you find it necessary to dole out short sentence condemnations of other people’s thoughts? Last time I checked your input wasn’t all that mattered. If I’m out of line someone other than Kyle please tell me.

            • cjdubbya

              I just thought that was his M.O., to be king of the BN message boards.

              • Chef Brian

                He is certainly “Quipmaster” Kyle today.

            • Kyle

              Need a tissue?

              • Chef Brian

                There he is! Is that all you got? Since you scrutinize all the comments, just so you could make an idiotic remark. I knew you’d come up with a snarky quip. No Kyle, I’m sure you are sitting in your underwear in mom’s basement, due to the v amount of energy you waste criticizing people on this board. Since your ego is super fragile(I’ve never seen you let anything go) and you more often than not sound like a smug, jerk. I think the better question is: Does Kyle need a tissue?

                • CubFan Paul

                  Pot calling the kettle smug.

                • Chef Brian

                  Ok Cub Paul, fair enough. I retract my last criticism of Kyle, it was uncalled for and unnecessary. I don’t want to contribute to constant bickering that has over taken this site recently. I am sorry for attacking you Kyle. I just think Imo you owe the other people on this site more respect than you give at times. I realize this is a message board and not the real world but there is no reason that we can’t conduct ourselves in a civilized fashion. So I’m sorry, not my best day on this board.

            • Bob D

              This site, NSBB, BCB, PSD, every board all day every day. He’s single handedly ruined every Cubs blog for me.

        • C. Steadman

          i think nate’s OBP is too low to slot in the leadoff role(career .314)…even tho he bats 1.000 in the leadoff role(1 for 1 2B) haha

    • TWC

      “Seriously, WTF are those two doing right now.”

      Probably killing time at work, browsing the internet, trolling Cubs fan blogs. You can’t relate?

    • YourResidentJag

      I hate to say this. The Winter Meetings are a baseball trade convention where stuff happens to get done like trades. Not the other way around.

  • Rebuilding

    I might have something to get moderately excited about Rick Hahn. He trades a high FIP guy for a high OBP guy. Moneyball on the Southside

    • Blackhawks1963

      Rick Hahn inherited a trainwreck plus an owner with allergy to spending properly on all phases of a good baseball operation, but give him time and I think he will do good things with the Sox. I like nearly every move he has made while on the job. Eaton is a big upgrade defensively for that team. Which is important for a team building around pitching. Santiago could just as soon be a 5.50 ERA guy in 2014.

    • cubsfan08

      And 3 DH’s :)

    • terencemann

      It’s interesting to see a nice move that will help the franchise for several years to come as his first trade. It’s not like he just got a franchise cornerstone but it’s always nice to see fans get their wish.

  • Required

    They are doing keg stands with Mickey and Jell-O shots with Snow White.

    • Jay

      I really don’t know what you guys expect from Jed and Theo. They aren’t going to make deals just to make one for a season that they’re already writing off. They’re going to wait until moves have been made and if there’s value out there, they’ll go after it. And by value, I don’t mean the Choo’s of the world. There’s no reason to add expensive pieces now unless it comes to us at a discount and we think it’ll still be useful in a couple of years.

  • http://ehanauer.com clark addison

    I don’t think the Cubs plan on trading Samardzija. They are floating the trade possibilities to pressure him to lower his contract demands.

    • Blackhawks1963


      Jeff Samardzija has TWO YEARS remaining on his contract. TWO YEARS. He is not a free agent…isn’t about to become a free agent…and there is absolutely no urgency to negotiate a new contract.

      • CubFan Paul

        “there is absolutely no urgency to negotiate a new contract”

        Yes there is…cost control.

      • cms0101

        There is urgency if you want to work out a team-friendly deal with him by giving him more than arbitration would call for now, while locking up 2-3 additional years below what he could get on the open market. That’s what this comes down to. They want to lock in his cost for his remaining prime years rather than enter a bidding war in free agency. If they can’t, why not get the young players that will replace him now so that you can get started with their development as a Cub. His value is higher now, so they aren’t forced to move him. It only takes one team to meet the asking price.

      • Rebuilding

        Depends…if you think he is going to unlock his potential and have a great year (which I’m sure you might if you are thinking extension) then getting an extension signed before the season seems pretty important

  • Die hard

    Barney good field no hit for Brown good hit no field with Valbuena then at 2B?

  • Chef Brian

    Weren’t the Angels supposedly interested in Shark? Maybe already someone mentioned this since I haven’t gone through all the comments. Maybe they are putting pieces together for a run at Samardzija?

    • CubFan Paul

      Only if Bradley is in that package.

      • Chef Brian

        The Angels have other prospects hence why they are a accumulating prospects that might interest the Cubs. Last I checked Bradley wasn’t the only prospect that could get it done and he has never seriously entered the conversation except from the Cubs side.

        • CubFan Paul

          There will be no deal with Arizona if Bradley isn’t involved. Theo&Co want a top shelf/can’t miss pitching prospect in return for their top shelf/can’t miss Shark, not secondary prospects.

          • Kyle

            “There will be no deal with Arizona if Bradley isn’t involved. ”

            Then it is very unlikely there will be a deal with Arizona.

            • CubFan Paul

              Then so be it.

              • Chef Brian

                Why do you keep mentioning Arizona? I’m talking about Anaheim, I agree with you on Arizona.

                • CubFan Paul

                  Ha! I had Arizona on the brain, sorry.

  • CeeDeeVee

    How good is the Reds’ minor league system? They’re in on Arroyo, so that would leave no room for Cingrani once again. I would take him and 3 good prospects.

  • Norm

    Rockies get Brett Anderson, per Buster’s twitter.
    For Drew Pomeranz + Chris Jensen.

    • Norm

      I mean Rosenthal’s twitter

    • Blackhawks1963

      Damaged goods for damaged goods. Colorado picks up a salary and invests in Anderson rebounding. Pomeranz seems completely hopeless at this point.

    • Jon

      ha, and people wanted to give up Alcantera for him. I told you he could have been had for basically free.

  • Bwa

    I’d say the sox are pretty even in this deal. I would have wanted more for Santiago then just eaton though

    • Blackhawks1963

      Santiago is marginal. Is he a back of rotation starter? I’m not convinced of that.

  • North Side Irish

    Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 3m
    Source: #Rockies acquire Brett Anderson from #Athletics for Drew Pomeranz and Chris Jensen.

    So much for that idea…

  • Pingback: Rockies Reportedly Acquire Brett Anderson from A’s for Drew Pomeranz and Chris Jensen | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary()

  • Aaron

    If he’s not going to sign an extension with the Cubs, why not use Shark as the closer for the next 2 seasons? We all know he wants to start, because that’s where the big money is. What obligations do we have for Shark if he’s not going to “play ball” with us?

  • Chuck24

    This whole thing about trading Samardzija is starting to tick me off. The whole idea of having a strong farm system is to produce quality major league talent. Pitching is the foundation of any great team…An what have the Cubs done with the last three, best pitching prospects they’ve brought up (Chris Archer, Andrew Cashner and, now likely, Samardzija) they traded (or a looking to trade) them. Theo…stop tearing up the foundation and get the future started now. Continuing to trade for prospects reminds me of the mechanic who loves to work on the engine but never puts the car on the road.

  • Hutch

    Shark isn’t going anywhere. No one is gonna give up what we’re looking for. Be much better off trading him in july

  • Die hard

    Angels have a Pujols yoke around their neck

  • johnny chess Aka 2much2say

    Protection only allows the hitter to see better pitches it’s up to the Hitter to take advantage Cabrera Fielder is a prime example of protection

    • Drew7

      Have you looked at Cabrera’s numbers pre- and post-Fielder? I feel like I’ve looked at them in the past and saw no noticeable change.

  • johnny chess Aka 2much2say

    and now Goldschmidt has Trumbo for protection should add 5 -10 HR’s for Goldie

  • nashvillecub

    I know their farm system still needs rebuilding, but I’m really impressed with what Hahn has done with the White Sox. Old, salary bloated team just a year and a half to two years ago. They now have some young talent to be excited about at the major league level. Garcia, Abreu, Viciedo, Eaton, while not perfect, are young players that give you hope for the future. If they can find takers for Dunn and Danks while shedding those contracts, I’d say their offseason was a huge success. Love the Cubs, like the Sox, but credit goes where it’s due.

    • Dave

      I hate to admit it bit Hahn in one season has improved the major league club greatly by adding young major league ready talent.
      This is a much quicker way to rebuild than the Cubs are taking for sure.

      • C. Steadman

        yeah, I hate how the Sox now have a good GM…i wanted Adam Eaton but now i will venomously root against him

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.

Need more baseball goodness? Check out Ball Vids - the Best Baseball Videos.