Nearly every player on the Cubs is a potential trade candidate so talking about each one would be exhaustive and pointless. Luis Valbuena is a trade candidate though why any team would trade for him, I don't know. It's not like there was a line of teams wanting to sign him after he was DFA'd and he's not been very good so it's safe say that he's a candidate, but not a very good one. And not worth any more discussion. Same goes for others like him. You know who they are. They litter the Cubs roster.
Matt Garza is going to be out of action until after the deadline with an arm-related injury so take him off the market. It's possible a team would still want to acquire him, but not at all likely any team would be willing to give up what they may have before considering the injury. As a result, it's safe to say he'll be a Cub on August 1st. There is the waiver deadline at the end of August so he could still be traded in August, but the Cubs would lack any leverage in negotiations. I wouldn't put much money on him staying put all season, but I feel confident saying he's probably going to be a Cub when the season ends.
At that point the team can revisit trading him. Theo and Hoyer can also slap each other in the face a few times between now and then for not trading him last offseason. He had more value last offseason with 2 full years remaining prior to being eligible to file for free agency than he'd have had four months later at the deadline. Not to mention, there's always a decent possibility a pitcher will get injured. Considering Garza was coming off what was arguably the best season in his career, one should have expected he'd regress, which would then of course lower his value. Garza should have been traded last offseason if the team had interest in doing it and they clearly did. They worked through much of the offseason talking to teams about Garza and those talks continued as the trade deadline approached this year.
Instead of acquiring the quality prospects the Cubs could have last offseason, they're stuck with a player who will receive roughly $12-13 million next year and be projected for no more than 3 WAR. He has very little surplus trade value now.
To the Cubs credit, they worked out a favorable deal for the team by trading Ryan Dempster to the Braves for Randall Delgado. Dempster would of course decline the trade. I'm unsure if he ever actually declined it, but he never agreed to it, which is the same thing. The deal went down the drain along with any leverage the Cubs had. They're now stuck negotiating with the Dodgers who know they have the leverage and other options still available so they're not going to give up what the Cubs want.
Braves GM Frank Wren has said they've moved on and the deal is off the table, but it's possible the Cubs could go back to him with Dempster's approval and receive the same prospect in return. The chances of this become slimmer each day, but it's what Theo and Jed are hoping for. Whether or not it proves to be false hope remains to be seen.
Garza entered the season as the most likely trade candidate and Dempster joined him with his especially strong first half. Aside from those two the Cubs lack any trade candidates who are going to help out the organization beyond a marginal improvement. There was the possibility that Geovany Soto could rebound, but that hasn't happened. He's split time behind the plate and not performed well doing it. Catchers are valuable and although Soto is making more than you'd hope for someone who is performing as he is, it wouldn't surprise me to see a contender looking for a better backup in the next few days.
Ian Stewart is out for the season. The Cubs had hoped he'd turn his career around and become a contributor for the Cubs. At worst they were hoping he'd improve somewhat and become corner infield trade candidate. That didn't happen and it's probable that Josh Vitters will be taking over at the hot corner next season so Stewart's days as a Cub are probably over.
Jeff Baker has some value, but not all that much. He can hit lefties well and play multiple positions. Every year these types of players are acquired and every year teams get C prospects in return.
Carlos Marmol entered the season as an interesting player if things went right. He was coming off a down season, but the guy has potential nobody can deny. He also has some of the worst control anyone has ever seen at the MLB level. This year the control got the better of him as he's walking more than 9 per 9. He's had a terrible season, lost the job as closer and even since returning from the DL hasn't been very good. He's thrown 19 innings, walked 16 and has an ERA over 4. He's due $9 million next year and based on the last season and a half it's hard to imagine any team wanting much at all to do with him. The Cubs could throw in a lot of money, but even then it's going to be difficult to get much of anything in return.
David DeJesus was signed a 2-year, $10 million contract in the offseason with a 3rd year team option. About the best that can be said of DeJesus's season is that he's produced .6 fWAR and .4 rWAR. He had a fantastic May, but other than that he's been pretty bad. His contract is more than manageable, but he's working on his second consecutive season of being a below average hitter. He is the kind of a guy a contender might like to acquire to be a 4th outfielder though. The Cubs will probably have to pay some of his contract and the Cubs won't get much in return.
There's Travis Wood who was off to a good start before falling apart. He's still relatively young and cost controlled so the Cubs probably won't be actively shopping him, but they'd definitely include him. Wood was part of the Sean Marshall trade so at best the team would be looking at a marginal prospect in return.
Alfonso Soriano is owed way too much to be appealing to teams and teams have appeared unwilling to even trade for him with the Cubs paying almost all of his remaining salary. That could change in the coming days, but I'm not betting on it. Even if they do trade him, it's just to free up a spot in the outfield. That's the best thing the Cubs will get in return because any prospect won't be worth much.
There's Reed Johnson, but he's a 4th or 5th outfielder so there's not much to acquire there. There are far too many C prospects and below to even speculate on what the Cubs could get, but it won't be impressive.
The Cubs entered the season hoping for rebounds from Ryan Dempster, Geovany Soto and Carlos Marmol because it would have helped increase the potential return on trades. They got a very nice rebound from Dempster, but his no-trade rights takes the leverage away from the Cubs when negotiating any trades. Soto and Marmol didn't rebound and even took a step back. Matt Garza was the other obvious trade candidate and he's injured. Look for a few minor trades, probably even one including Dempster, but don't expect much in return. The Cubs rebuilding process is on hold until the offseason.
Comments
Josh, hope you don’t mind that I used your image here. Good job.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
‘s cool
joshQuote Reply
Twitters saying Braves could still be interested in Dempster, but no chance at Delgado now.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
That doesn’t make any sense to me. Dempster has had just one start so maybe Delgado is more of a long shot, but no chance? Are the Braves paying more for someone who wants to be a Brave or something? My guess is that if Dempster told Theo he’d accept a trade to the Braves today they could get the same deal they had in place. There hasn’t been enough time expire to make sense otherwise. just my opinion.
mb21Quote Reply
The Braves are currently tied for the wild card and still projected to win their division so it’s rather surprising to me they’d be willing to give up much of anything at the deadline.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
KG in particular was emphatic that Delgado was out of the deal. Wren sounded that way, too, but who knows how much of that is posturing on his part.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ mb21:
Yeah, that’s my thinking. Delgado was a one time shot, offered up in a moment of desperation. Once the Braves had time to recognize the leverage they had, and saw how their competitors were valuing Dempster (and I would be remiss not to point out that Dempster’s balking at the deal made that possible), I think Delgado became an impossibility. Once they saw the Cubs offer Demp for Webster, they knew they could get him for less than Delgado. No reason for them to move off that stance right now. If Johnson goes to TX, though, maybe LA and ATL get a bit more desperate. Could be Theo is holding out for a bidding war once Johnson is off the market.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
I read Wren’s comments and he did say that, but I just find it hard to believe. I also find it hard to believe Atlanta would really be insistent on adding talent and subtracting prospects when they already have a very good chance of playing in October. So maybe it’s true and Wren is just stupid. I don’t know, but if you’re willing to give him, it would make no sense one start would go from willing to give up to no fucking chance.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
MB–Josh’s HM panel clearly calls for feeding the Hope Monster, not starving him. (dying laughing)
Example: Soriano is showing he is still one of the best 80 OF in MLB. His improved hitting and durability, plus his clubhouse presence will make him a desirable target particularly for AL teams, but not out of the question for NL teams, though it would suck to see him go to St. Louis. With the Cubs paying nearly 90% of his salary he should bring a B pitcher from AA or higher and 2 other A-ball prospects. Or they trade him and Maholm and less money to SF for Zito and a good AAA pitcher. Remember, with season-long interleague play next year, Soriano’s value increases in the NL.
(dying laughing)
SVBQuote Reply
Following exchange from Twitter:
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ mb21:
I think it just means that Wren either (1) never included Delgado in the first place or (2) realized given a moment to survey things that he was overpaying and went public with this “expiring parameters” business. Prob a bit of both.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
2 is more likely, but I think Wren is wrong to assume that the Dodgers wouldn’t be willing to give up more if another team was involved. The Dodgers have the leverage here because it has seemed they were the only team involved. Adding another team would presumably increase the Dodgers offer.
mb21Quote Reply
From your previous:
I was following the game and I think Rosscup had either gotten one or two outs in that inning when he walked those two guys around a couple strikeouts. Then he was lifted and the reliever (I want to say Rhoderick) walked the bases loaded and then walked in two runs. I know that he was charged with the two runs but I’d like to think that it wasn’t his fault that his teammate sucked.
Do you really think the Cubs would just accept a lowball offer instead of letting Dempster ride for the whole season for the comp pick?
Rice CubeQuote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
I didn’t yesterday, but I do now and I’m going to write a post about why they won’t offer arbitration later today. I can’t spoil the ending. (dying laughing)
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
Damn you, leverage or lack thereof! *shaking fists*
Rice CubeQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
Did Wren ever explicitly state that Delgado was part of the deal? I don’t remember for sure and either of your scenarios seem equally likely to me if the Delgado business was just tweets and sources and not confirmed later by Wren. I do seem to recall you and GW getting on me last Tuesday when I said, based on the reporting, all I really believed was that Atlanta and the Cubs had talked about Dempster in a deal and that the reporting of the specifics was BS, which seems to be what you are alluding to in #1. 🙂
Of course, by now, the public posturing and leverage-establishment via media has been so muddied up that I doubt one could ever really determine what was true and what was posturing either last weekend or since then.
SVBQuote Reply
All we really know for sure was that a deal was in place and then they took it to the players. We know Dempster was one of them, but we don’t know for certain Delgado was. I think it’s safe to say he was, but it wouldn’t come as a shock if he wasn’t. Wren has never confirmed this as far as I know, but I do think we should accept he most likely was part of the deal.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
I agree with this. I’d only say that I don’t think our assurance that Delgado was in the deal fits within a 95% confidence interval, though it probably does fall within one standard error. The reporting I saw was so fuzzy that the data didn’t support the assertion well enough. Guess that’s my problem. Too worried about Type 1 error. (dying laughing)
/amazed to be married.
SVBQuote Reply
SVB wrote:
(dying laughing)
Suburban kidQuote Reply
F7 —> Marmol mode
Rice CubeQuote Reply
SVB wrote:
..as evidenced by today’s triple.
/feeding the animals
SVBQuote Reply
http://tinypic.com/r/o550f4/6
Umpires suck. Those are borderline pitches, but all of them except the high fastball have a piece of the ball in the zone. They’re strikes, umpires are awful.
DoogolasQuote Reply
WaLi99Quote Reply
ReJo with the successful Neifi
Suburban kidQuote Reply
Let’sgo Castro
Suburban kidQuote Reply
Horrible call at first base to end the inning.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
@ Suburban kid:
He was figuratively safe by a mile!
WaLi99Quote Reply
MVP DOING MVP THINGS
Suburban kidQuote Reply
OR NOT
Suburban kidQuote Reply
IRONIC ALL CAPS IS THE NEW BLACK. H/T MO.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ Rice Cube:
F7 ————-> regression to career BB% mode
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ Doogolas:
Did you see Angel Hernandez in the White Sox game the other night? Rung a guy up on strikes, all 3 “strikes” well out of the zone. All three! I can see missing one pitch. But all three?
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
Barret Browning is a funny name for a Cardinals pitcher.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
No he was just working on a screwball today. That and a gyroball. .
That’s the go to excuse when he doesn’t have a good outing.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
I forgot about this plethora of new pitches.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
I loved that excuse.
FWIW, F7 did seem to recover after the 1st, but didn’t have very good control today. He got a little lucky, but it’s better to be lucky than unlucky. (dying laughing)
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
He’s been playing with fire all year. Even when he is on, his location is not good. Lots of stuff up in the zone, especially the fastball.
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
I haven’t paid all that much attention to be honest so I’ll take your word for it. All I know is that I still don’t buy the improved control. Talk to me at this time next year and I might, but not yet.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
Here’s his Brooks card:
http://brooksbaseball.net/player_cards/player_card.php?player=502188
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
There’s a US Olympian with the name Destinee Hooker? That cannot possibly be her name. What’s her middle name? I hope her full name is Destinee Mensclub Hooker.
mb21Quote Reply
mb21 wrote:
Dante.
Rizzo the RatQuote Reply
If you’re last name is Hooker, can’t you do your daughter a favor by not giving her a common name for strippers and hookers? Any guesses what her brother (does she have one?) might be named?
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
women’s volleyball player? yes, she used to play at texas.
first time i saw that (front page of the student newspaper) i was stunned that she managed to make anything of herself given her asshole parents.
GWQuote Reply
@ mb21:
I know a couple who name their daughter Reverence Remembered [Last Name Redacted].
Mercurial OutfielderQuote Reply
@ GW:
Yeah volleyball. Saw a tweet and then had to do a search because I didn’t believe it was real. Sure enough. It’s unreal. What a shitty fucking name to have.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
Inevitable Pimpof
GWQuote Reply
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
(dying laughing)
mb21Quote Reply
mb21 wrote:
T.J.
Suburban kidQuote Reply
What is it with parents who think a name is cute? They’re not the ones who have to live the rest of their lives with that name. Just name them Bob or Sally and move on.
mb21Quote Reply
@ mb21:
Yes. That also goes for newly-minted (but popular) names like Nevaeh (get it?).
Rizzo the RatQuote Reply
I also hate how “Madison” is now a girls’ name. When it was used in Splash it was a joke. The mermaid didn’t have a name so she took one off a street sign. When she says that’s her name, Tom Hanks yells, “That’s not a name!” That joke is forever ruined now.
Rizzo the RatQuote Reply
@ Rizzo the Rat:
I hope someone who named a child Nevaeh will name their other child Lleh.
mb21Quote Reply
I knew someone who met a child with a name pronounced “ash-oh-lay.” They spelled it, Asshole. For real.
Aisle424Quote Reply
@ Aisle424:
That’s ridiculous. (dying laughing)
new shit: http://obstructedview.net/commentary-and-analysis/why-the-cubs-will-trade-ryan-dempster-for-whatever-they-can-get.html
mb21Quote Reply
@ Aisle424:
What the fuck were they thinking?
mb21Quote Reply