Cubs Request Release Waivers On Nate Schierholtz

AUG. 13: The Cubs have placed Schierholtz on release waivers, tweets Mark Gonzales of the Chicago Tribune. He will officially be a free agent when he clears on Friday.

AUG. 6: The Cubs have designated outfielder Nate Schierholtz for assignment, tweets Mark Gonzales of the Chicago Tribune. With the move, roster space was created for Kyuji Fujikawa‘s activation from the 60-day DL.

Schierholtz, a 30-year-old left-handed hitter, was playing on a $5MM salary this season in his final year of arbitration eligibility. Unless Chicago can find a taker for all or part of that figure, they’ll be on the hook for most (if not all) of the money left owing.

The veteran of eight MLB campaigns had struggled to a .192/.240/.300 slash through 341 plate appearances this year, after posting a strong .251/.301/.470 line in 503 trips to bat in 2013. He had actually turned in three straight seasons with above-average OPS marks before hitting a wall this year.


42 Responses to Cubs Request Release Waivers On Nate Schierholtz Leave a Reply

  1. jrodhard 12 months ago

    should have traded him last july when his value was at its peak.

    • TheoHoyer 12 months ago

      I agree, but only to an extent. His value to the ML team probably outweighed the B-level prospect return the Cubs would have gotten for him. Plus, at the time, he was hitting pretty well and still had another year of cheap control. There are just so many prospects you can have in your farm system. Coming into the 2014 season, Schierholtz was, sadly, the best outfielder arm and bat in the Cubs lineup.

      • Chris Lattier 12 months ago

        I agree with all of your statement except the, “There are just so many prospects you can have in your farm system”.

        • It’s true in certain instances. Schierholtz isn’t the kind of player who would get legit prospects back. There’s only so many spots in the minors and if what you’re being offered isn’t better than what you have already, it doesn’t make sense to make a deal. The Cubs have a deep system.

          • Chris Lattier 12 months ago

            Yes I agreed with all of that already. Schierholtz, last year — had 1 more year of control, was hitting well and no other team was offering anything of value for him…of course you hang on to him.

          • I see. Then why did you single out the portion that lead to my reply?

          • Chris Lattier 12 months ago

            I originally responded to TheoHoyer — he said, “I agree, but only to an extent. His value to the ML team probably
            outweighed the B-level prospect return the Cubs would have gotten for
            him. Plus, at the time, he was hitting pretty well and still had another
            year of cheap control. There are just so many prospects you can have
            in your farm system. Coming into the 2014 season, Schierholtz was,
            sadly, the best outfielder arm and bat in the Cubs lineup”

            Which is essentially what you said….the only problem with the original statement by TheoHoyer is that “there are just so many prospects you can have in your farm system.” I just think that you would want every guy in your farm system to have value and you can’t have enough prospects.

          • Chris Lattier 12 months ago

            you can’t have enough prospects…if Schierholtz isn’t getting anything back (worthy prospects/young players) than his value outweighed the return…separate from that…you can never have too many prospects.

  2. David Levenfeld 12 months ago

    Every one of his at-bats was wasted, and could have been used for players with future promise. Just like Darwin Barney. Management’s stubborn insistence on playing those two is an insult to fans that deserve better than players hitting sub-.200.

  3. TRAPstar 12 months ago

    I predict that the Giants will bring Nate back home to SF

    • Joe 12 months ago

      I just read from Henry Schulman that Bruce Bochy would have him back, though I am not sure if that was Schulman’s speculation or Bochy’s words.

    • kungfucampby 12 months ago

      Yeah he’s likely going right back to San Fran.

    • Wooltron 12 months ago

      The Giants are pretty set as far as back up outfielders who can’t hit goes.

  4. Chioakcisco 12 months ago

    Too bad the pride of Chabot College fell off so badly this year. Good luck Nate.

  5. Andrew Collins 12 months ago

    What?!! Everyone crying the Phillies should have kept him. Don’t think it would have mattered.

  6. onemanrevival 12 months ago

    Is Nate Schierholtz better than Travis Snider? If Neal thinks so, he might head to Pittsburgh while Cutch rests

    • Ron Loreski 12 months ago

      The Pirates should get Schierholtz anyway and DFA Gabby Sanchez. Gabby isn’t holding up his end of the platoon AT ALL, so might as well let Ike Davis play everyday. Put Snider back in his PH role, and let Schierholtz play the outfield.

  7. Lefty_Orioles_Fan
    Lefty_Orioles_Fan 12 months ago

    Count me as interested for the O’s to go and get him.
    Although, I wonder if he will make it out of the National League.

  8. “Unless Chicago can find a taker for all or part of that figure, they’ll be on the hook for most (if not all)”

    So if the Cubs can’t get someone to take all or part, they’ll be responsible for all or most? What happens if they can get someone to take all or part?

    • TheoHoyer 12 months ago

      The Cubs are responsible for his entire contract minus the league minimum, if he signs a minor league contract with another team and is called up. If he is called up, he would be paid the league minimum, and the Cubs would pay the remainder of his 5 million dollar contract.

  9. kylecthomas 12 months ago

    he will be a giant by the end of the week

    • Wooltron 12 months ago

      Why would the Giants want a third back up outfielder who can’t hit? Blanco and Perez have that role covered.

  10. Ray Koenig 12 months ago

    The Cubs will get something for Schierholtz. They always do when they move someone.

  11. Cosmo3 12 months ago

    Oh well, win some lose some. Shierholtz, EJax, and Ian Stewart are the only three bad moves I can think of Theo/co. making- which is a huge success IMO considering these didn’t even really hurt us to bad, and no GM bats 1.000. Otherwise, their moves have overwhelmingly been good to great, and I believe we’re about to finally see the end result- a very competitive, cost-controlled ball club that is able to maintain its competitiveness year-in-year-out for many seasons to come.

    For all us Cubs fans have suffered, I still have a hard time believing how competent a FO we suddenly now have, especially when we were living in the whimsical world of Hendry just a few short years ago, and this team was a disaster top to bottom.

    • cjdubbya 12 months ago

      I don’t think Schierholtz was a bad move, he’s just having a bad season. Had a decent season in 2013.

    • Jamesonhendry 12 months ago

      I’m going to tell Hoyer to sign Edwin to an 8 year extension at league max.

  12. Brad Vance 12 months ago

    Nate hit 21 homers last year, 19 went to RF.
    HE has 6 this season, all to RF.
    I think that screams Yankees.
    The less Ichiro in RF the better IMO.

    • Joe 12 months ago

      When he first requested a trade from the Giants, I was thinking Yankees because of the short porch. If he wants to bulk up his numbers for free agency this offseason, then he should sign in NY.

      • DaCubsDaBears 12 months ago

        Build up his numbers ??
        You assume the other teams dont adjust for park effects ??

        • Joe 12 months ago

          Still helps in contract negotiations to have 15 homers vs 5, wouldn’t you say?

    • DodgersMavericksCowboysMadrid 12 months ago

      Tell me how many home runs Ellsbury has, McCann, Beltran. I dont see any of their stats improving. You are senseless

      • Joe 12 months ago

        Ever heard of a down season? It is possible for multiple players to have them at the same time.

  13. WashingtonRancors 12 months ago

    Should have traded him last year when he would have brought back……something

  14. Can one of the people saying “should have traded him last year” point me to the trade offer the Cubs turned down for Schierholtz? I’m curious which stud prospect was being offered for Schierholtz (lifetime batting avg .254) at last years trade deadline. I can’t find anything about it.

  15. philly_435 12 months ago

    When I saw this I was surprised because I haven’t really been following him this year, then I was even more shocked when I saw that .192

  16. bigbadjohnny 12 months ago

    About $1.3 million left on the contract…….any takers ?

  17. Geoff Bonn 12 months ago

    Come home, Nate.

  18. Lefty_Orioles_Fan
    Lefty_Orioles_Fan 12 months ago

    Still interested in Nate the Great!

Leave a Reply