NEWSLETTER
Tomorrow marks the last day that a team can make a trade (via the waiver system) for a player, and include that player on its post-season roster. The Chicago Cubs have already made a couple waiver trades, sending Mike Fontenot to the Giants and Derrek Lee to the Braves.
But are the Cubs done dealing? They are assuredly still working the phones to try and outsource Kosuke Fukudome and Xavier Nady, but beyond that, no one believes the Cubs are considering moving anyone else.
Well, except maybe Richard Durrett, who writes the Texas Rangers blog for ESPNDallas. In a list of potential acquisition targets for the Rangers, Durrett lists a Cub – but not one you’d expect:
Marlon Byrd, Cubs: I only throw this in there because I find it intriguing, but Byrd fits the mold. He can play all the outfield positions and has a big bat against lefties. Byrd is hitting .366 with four homers and 19 RBIs against left-handed pitching this season. But, of course, he has two more years left on his contract in Chicago and I can’t think the Cubs would consider dealing him. Even if they do, it would involve a top prospect. So I can’t see it happening. But could you imagine Byrd back in the Rangers’ clubhouse down the stretch? ESPN Dallas.
Byrd’s contract escalates the next two years ($5.5 million in 2011, $6.5 million in 2012), and it’s possible that the Cubs could have Tyler Colvin or Kosuke Fukudome handle center field until prospect Brett Jackson is ready for the bigs (perhaps as soon as mid-season next year).
But that’s where the “this is possible” stops.
The Cubs love Marlon Byrd, and given his production and defense this year, they’ve got him relatively cheap over the next two years. Further, would Byrd really pass through waivers without being claimed by any NL team or any AL team with a worse record than the Rangers? Given his contract, it seems like a number of teams would be happy to take him on for the next couple of years, even if they’re not competitive this year.
In short, a trade of Marlon Byrd seems highly unlikely for a number of reasons.
