Jeff Samardzija and Jason Hammel traded to Oakland Athletics for Addison Russell plus

[Parade_Rain]

Unless you can get a mega-return on Shark, he stays in Chicago. The funny thing is that the business model was supposedly having the "revenue streams" converge on Wrigley at the same time as the talent. The talent acquired appears to be ahead of the revenue streams. They are going to find that the talent is the revenue stream.

 

[chibears55]

I just don't get it. Trade him for a kid that you have to hope matures into what Shark already is. Why? Because of money? **** that....pay him. Then get some of these young bats up here and score a few runs....funny how much better a pitching staff is when they get a few runs to work with.

They could pay him 20 mil per but are you satisfied with samardzija being your ACE for the next 6 yrs ?

Because their not gonna go out and spend another 20+ Mil on another starter that could be a true ACE, at least not til the extra revenue comes in in a few years.

 

[Parade_Rain]

They could pay him 20 mil per but are you satisfied with samardzija being your ACE for the next 6 yrs ?

Because their not gonna go out and spend another 20+ Mil on another starter that could be a true ACE, at least not til the extra revenue comes in in a few years.

If another team doesn't want to trade the Cubs extremely solid MLB prospects in return, you hold on to him until next season at the trading deadline. As far as I know, he's FA in 2016.

 

[Diehardfan]

They could pay him 20 mil per but are you satisfied with samardzija being your ACE for the next 6 yrs ?

Because their not gonna go out and spend another 20+ Mil on another starter that could be a true ACE, at least not til the extra revenue comes in in a few years.

Ace? It's all baseball rhetoric. You need him to be one of 4 or 5 starters that can get it done...you'll be amazed on how much better this group will be if they score a few runs for them. With rainouts, spring injuries and cold snaps one thru five doesn't mean shit after the first two weeks of the season anyway.

 

[chibears55]

If another team doesn't want to trade the Cubs extremely solid MLB prospects in return, you hold on to him until next season at the trading deadline. As far as I know, he's FA in 2016.

I agree but keep in mind if they do hold onto him til next year and dont agree to an extension , their going to get even less in return in a trade.

 

[chibears55]

Ace? It's all baseball rhetoric. You need him to be one of 4 or 5 starters that can get it done...you'll be amazed on how much better this group will be if they score a few runs for them. With rainouts, spring injuries and cold snaps one thru five doesn't mean shit after the first two weeks of the season anyway.

He would be their highest paid starter at 20 mil, so that means any other FA starter they might sign will be of lesser cost meaning lesser talent then him.

So he would on the cubs be their no.1 srarter/ACE

Yea they need offense that can score runs but you also need to make sure you have a solid rotation so your not relying on the offense to score 5+ runs every game to win

 

[Parade_Rain]

I agree but keep in mind if they do hold onto him til next year and dont agree to an extension , their going to get even less in return in a trade.

Yep. It would be a gamble, but remember what they got for Garza. I'm not saying Shark will deliver similar returns, but that was a similar situation wher the trading partner needed to rent MG for a playoff run and hope to sign him in the off-season.

 

[Boobaby1]

Yep. It would be a gamble, but remember what they got for Garza. I'm not saying Shark will deliver similar returns, but that was a similar situation wher the trading partner needed to rent MG for a playoff run and hope to sign him in the off-season.

True!. And lets also keep in mind that the Cubs have netted absolutely NOTHING when trying to acquire the pitcher they wanted. Coming in second doesn't account for anything.

Until they can prove to start landing ANY free agents, they better hold onto what they got. If they don't get a solid return, the best thing they could do to me is sign some players in the off-season that are worth a shit, and that would leave the option for the Cubs to either trade Shark in the off-season, at the deadline, or hold onto him if they are somehow in a playoff run. At least they would get a pick for him at worst case scenario.

This offseason is the time to start adding bona fide players, and yes, there are some out there that could definitely help.

 

[Diehardfan]

He would be their highest paid starter at 20 mil, so that means any other FA starter they might sign will be of lesser cost meaning lesser talent then him.

So he would on the cubs be their no.1 srarter/ACE

Yea they need offense that can score runs but you also need to make sure you have a solid rotation so your not relying on the offense to score 5+ runs every game to win

Good Lord, does every baseball fan have to follow the leader and speak every baseball cliche in the book. So he's the #1....the head honcho, numbero uno...so he pitches opening day and goes against the other teams "#1" guy. Then you get two rainouts and now he's going against the next team's #3. The only real difference between a one and a four is that one's theoretically should get more starts....but wait, now he's got a sore elbow and will miss a few starts and won't even get the most starts on the team. Can you not see this? #1 or "ace" doesn't really mean a thing over 162 games and teams that pay for that type of clarification are flat out stupid.

 

[chibears55]

Good Lord, does every baseball fan have to follow the leader and speak every baseball cliche in the book. So he's the #1....the head honcho, numbero uno...so he pitches opening day and goes against the other teams "#1" guy. Then you get two rainouts and now he's going against the next team's #3. The only real difference between a one and a four is that one's theoretically should get more starts....but wait, now he's got a sore elbow and will miss a few starts and won't even get the most starts on the team. Can you not see this? #1 or "ace" doesn't really mean a thing over 162 games and teams that pay for that type of clarification are flat out stupid.

ok, to make you happy ill ask the question this way because I guess you don't understand what im asking or your just avoiding it with the rant about ACE and NO.1 starter...

would you be ok with them signing samardzija for 20+ mil knowing that for the next few years the cubs most likely wont sign anyone close to that amount and having them have 4 other starters that would be in his lesser ? meaning that he most likely will be their best starter..

 

[Boobaby1]

ok, to make you happy ill ask the question this way because I guess you don't understand what im asking or your just avoiding it with the rant about ACE and NO.1 starter...

would you be ok with them signing samardzija for 20+ mil knowing that for the next few years the cubs most likely wont sign anyone close to that amount and having them have 4 other starters that would be in his lesser ? meaning that he most likely will be their best starter..

The Reds did it with Bailey. Is he their ACE?

Their is no guarantee that the Cubs can sign anyone for 20 million. Think the Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, Giants, Phillies, Cubs and whomever else will be going after Lester? What are the chances that they will outbid the heavy hitters since they are O'fer against them already?

Shark is the one thing they can guarantee of keeping if they don't get what they want in return. They know what he is asking for. Anything less than re-signing Shark (unless they get an absolute haul) and/or not obtaining Lester sets the club back yet again.

Rickett's better grow a set against the roof toppers, open up the FUCKING checkbook, and start fielding a quality team that is ran like the so-called Yankees and Red Sox who he admittedly said he wants to emulate since he has saved so much in payroll by not spending his entire existence of owning the damn Cubs team. :woot:

 

[Parade_Rain]

Good Lord, does every baseball fan have to follow the leader and speak every baseball cliche in the book. So he's the #1....the head honcho, numbero uno...so he pitches opening day and goes against the other teams "#1" guy. Then you get two rainouts and now he's going against the next team's #3. The only real difference between a one and a four is that one's theoretically should get more starts....but wait, now he's got a sore elbow and will miss a few starts and won't even get the most starts on the team. Can you not see this? #1 or "ace" doesn't really mean a thing over 162 games and teams that pay for that type of clarification are flat out stupid.

I want Tom Seaver or Sandy Koufax on the mound in the heat of the post season. #1 or "ace" may not mean anything to you, but I don't want a #3 starting game 1 of the NLCS. That's why aces are shown the money.

 

[Boobaby1]

Well, they said last night on ESPN at the Yankees game that Jeff Samardzija could be the starting pitcher in the post season for any team. Don't know why they would say that if he was a #4.

Hell, 20 million is not ACE money anyways. Look around and see the salaries of Greinke, Kershaw, Verlander, Sabathia, Price, Tanaka....etc. I am sure Cueto, Sale, Scherzer, and Lester will demand a lot more than 20 million.

Arguing about 20 million per year to Shark after blowing chunks on E-Jax for 14 million seems pointless to me, especially with the Cubs payroll starting out at 31.5 million next year. Lets see if they invest the money not used on Tanaka and throw it into the team like they said they would.

 

[chibears55]

Wow.. talk about completely killing a simple question with turning it into another subject...
Aces, bailey,rooftops,ricketts balls, what other teams would do

Nobody arguing...
Its a simple yes no question of your opinion..

If they gave samardzija the money he wants would you be ok with him being the "guy" for this rotation for a couple years ?

Meaning until they get TV deal, ETC. their most likely not going to add another high cost big name starter so your basically looking at a rotation if samardzija and 4 lower cost starters for a few years.

 

[Parade_Rain]

Simple yes or no I would rather keep Jeff.

 

[chibears55]

Simple yes or no I would rather keep Jeff.

Thanks... so your ok with pretty much keeping rotation as is with samardzija arrieta wood jackson and prob. a rookie or low/med cost FA for a few years

 

[SilenceS]

Its like this. If they can trade Shark and get a huge haul then sign a Lester or a Max S., then yes, trading Shark would make sense. Trading him then signing no one sets back a franchise. People need to stop acting like its there money per season. The Cubs are looking to not spend on bats for years. Better spend on pitching because if they think they are going to win it all with a 80 million dollar payroll. We are going to lose for quite sometime.

 

[chibears55]

Its like this. If they can trade Shark and get a huge haul then sign a Lester or a Max S., then yes, trading Shark would make sense. Trading him then signing no one sets back a franchise. People need to stop acting like its there money per season. The Cubs are looking to not spend on bats for years. Better spend on pitching because if they think they are going to win it all with a 80 million dollar payroll. We are going to lose for quite sometime.

If they gave shark 25 mil I could care less...

But do you think if they give him the 20+ mil he asking for now that if another big arm becomes available next year looking for 20+ mil they will legitimately try to sign him ?

I personally don't think they will...

That why I asked the question, specifically to those who think they should give him the money...

Are you ok with shark being the guy for them for a few years ?

 

[Shawon0Meter]

If they gave shark 25 mil I could care less...

But do you think if they give him the 20+ mil he asking for now that if another big arm becomes available next year looking for 20+ mil they will legitimately try to sign him ?

I personally don't think they will...

Exactly why I've become OK with the idea of Shark getting 20 a year. There's obviously a line somewhere.....but I don't trust the Cubs to do anything to get better without him than with him.

I either want a lopsided trade in our favor or to keep him.

 

[beckdawg]

The Reds did it with Bailey. Is he their ACE?

The cubs offered Shark $500k less per season than the reds did with Bailey. Shark turned them down. Let's stop acting like the cubs are just being cheap here. A 5 year $85 mil deal for someone 1.5 years away from FA is perfectly fair. Anibal Sanchez who's been a much better pitcher than Shark got 5 years $80 mil prior to the 2013 season and he was a full FA not buying out 1.5 years of arbitration which are way cheaper.

I also find it interesting people are quite worried about replacing him when Maholm pitched better than him in 2012 and Feldman pitched better than him in 2013. Perhaps you can argue that this year he's been so much better but Hammel has a 2.98 ERA vs his 2.83. So at the very least their cheap signings have been as good if not better than Shark has at ~$5 mil per season. Then there's Arrieta who I think is in line for a regression but until that point he's been the cubs best pitcher this season who they got in return for Feldman.

I have no problem with them keeping Shark as he's a decent pitcher. But I really don't get this outrage for someone who's arguably been built up to something he's not. He's not Clayton Kershaw. He's not Felix Hernandez. He's more like Madison Bumgarner who signed a 6 year $35.56 million deal in 2012. Granted the Giants bought out more of his arbitration. However, even the years at the end of his normal FA period would only be $12 mil/season which is substantially lower than the $17 mil/season they offered Shark. Gio Gonzalez who's also been a better pitcher than Shark over the past 3 years that pays him $12 mil/year after his typical arbitration period. AJ Burnett has gotten $16.5 mil the past 2 seasons on the final years of the giant deal he got from the Yankees and is making $15 mil this year.

You don't get better by over paying people. Jordan Zimmermann becomes a FA in 2016. Mat Latos is a FA in 2016. Doug Fister is a FA in 2016. Johnny Cueto is a FA in 2016. Yu Darvish is a FA in 2017. Kris Medlen is a FA in 2016. David Price is a FA in 2016. Max Scherzer is a FA in 2015. Stephen Strasburg is a FA in 2017. Those are all options that have been better than Shark the past 2.5 years. James Shields is a FA in 2015. Jon Lester is a FA in 2015. Francisco Liriano is a FA in 2015. Rick Porcello is a FA in 2016. Those options have been within range of being as good as Shark.

So there are numerous options even if some of the guys above re-sign. And that's before you even talk about what they get in return.