The Athletic trio of Ken Rosenthal, Patrick Mooney, and Will Sammon dropped a Trade Deadline article that got me sitting up in my chair and typing rapidly this morning. You drop Justin Steele’s name in a rumor-type article and my eyes pop a bit.
“With a losing record and so many teams in front of them in the National League, the Chicago Cubs donโt foresee a scenario in which they become buyers at the July 30 trade deadline, according to sources familiar with the teamโs plans. That comes with an acknowledgment that the Cubs donโt have great pieces to sell, though they do have an expectation to contend in 2025, leaving them stuck in the middle.
Unless the Cubs somehow get creative and become opportunistic. Most front offices use those buzzwords at this time of year, and the Cubs remain in listening mode. Though the asking price would surely be astronomical, those conversations could theoretically include offers for standout left-hander Justin Steele.”
There is considerable discussion from there about the Cubs’ situation – the desire not to negatively impact 2025, the lack of obvious tradable pieces, not wanting to trade just to add fringe low-level minor leaguers, etc. – and Steele’s possible value on the market is noted.
Nico Hoerner comes in for a little generic discussion, too, but the vibe I get there is the same as what we already had: if there is enormous interest from some team, yes, the Cubs will have to consider it. But that seems unlikely.
The Steele mention is extremely interesting, obviously, but I don’t know that it’s all that serious, or worth fretting about yet, for at least a few reasons:
1.) This is pretty clearly NOT a situation where the Cubs are actively shopping Justin Steele, which would be a nonsense idea, so it’s kinda like every player on every roster – available for SOME price; and
2.) Fundamentally, the conversation here is identical to the one yesterday about Jameson Taillon, albeit with the required value ratcheted up considerably – the Cubs need and want a pitcher like Steele for 2025 (and beyond), so you couldn’t justify trading him now unless what you’re getting DRAMATICALLY outpaces that 2025+ value; and
3.) Steele was the name mentioned because he carries the most value, but the broader point is the more important thing: the Cubs aren’t buying, and, sure, they’d listen on anyone if the offers got crazy.
Now, I don’t want to say that this mention from some of the top reporters at The Athletic is completely meaningless. The item was reported, and the name was chosen, for a reason. I tend to think it is a signal only of what it actually says, however: the Cubs are listening on any player if some team wants to get crazy with an offer that DOES NOT hurt them for 2025+, but nobody expects that to happen on a player like Justin Steele.
I will speculate, though, that this getting out suggests guys like Taillon, Mike Tauchman, Mark Leiter Jr., as well as Hoerner (and any other obvious candidates), are probably available in a way that surpasses the bare minimum “technically there are no untouchables” threshold. I’d be shocked if the Cubs actually traded Nico Hoerner (much less Justin Steele), but I think the Cubs would be foolish not to at least listen, given that second base is a spot where they could plausibly have other options for 2025 internally. They really just have to listen on everyone.*
So, hey, if you want to offer up a package that provides more near-and-long-term value than the three arbitration seasons the Cubs already have on Justin Steele from 2025-27, go for it. The Cubs are clearly going to listen. But they aren’t going to shop him actively, because that would make no sense, and it’s pretty unlikely anything happens with the 29-year-old ace.
*(One guy I would say is likely not available in almost any deal is Shร ยta Imanaga. Pure opinion here, but I think the Cubs simply would not want to destroy the goodwill there with future Japanese players by signing a guy to a now-clearly-under-market contract based in part on his comfort in Chicago, and then IMMEDIATELY trading him.)