NL Notes: Hamels, Bastardo, Alderson, Neshek

Cole Hamels of the Phillies has been claimed on revocable waivers by an unknown team, and David Kaplan of CSNChicago.com notes that the Cubs might have interest. If in fact Chicago was the team that claimed him, trading for Hamels would be a huge splash for a Cubs team that’s spent the past few years mostly avoiding acquiring big-ticket players. The Cubs do, however, appear to be interested in an ace to complement their collection of young hitters — they were connected to Masahiro Tanaka last offseason. Hamels is signed through 2018 with a club/vesting option for 2019, with $96MM guaranteed after this season. His limited no-trade protection would allow him to block a deal to the Cubs, but Kaplan notes that Hamels reportedly had interest in pitching for the Cubs in the past. (UPDATE: ESPN’s Jayson Stark tweets that the Cubs are on the list of teams to which Hamels can be traded without his approval.) ESPN’s Buster Olney (Insider-only) noted earlier this week that claiming Hamels would make sense for the Cubs. Here are more notes from the National League.

  • Lefty reliever Antonio Bastardo was one of many Phillies veterans not traded at the deadline last week, but now he thinks a trade might help him, Ryan Lawrence of Philadelphia Daily News writes. “I think it could be good for me to stay here, but I think it could be better going somewhere else,” says Bastardo. “We have two young lefties here, and they can do a really good job. A third lefty in the bullpen . . . I think for my career – for my career – I should be somewhere else.” Lefties Jake Diekman and Mario Hollands have both pitched reasonably well out of the Phillies’ bullpen this year. The Phillies placed Bastardo and a number of other players on revocable waivers earlier this week. Here are more notes from the National League.
  • GM Sandy Alderson likely isn’t planning on leaving the Mets anytime soon, David Lennon of Newsday writes. “The goal is to have a winning team, and a playoff-qualifying team,” says Alderson. Alderson’s four-year contract ends this year, but he has an option for 2015.
  • Reliever Pat Neshek is a free agent this offseason, but he would prefer to stay with the Cardinals, Derrick Goold of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch writes. “I like it here,” says Neshek. “I like how I’m being used. That’s a big part of it. … I feel like I pitch really well at Busch Stadium. I think that would be good for my career, right?” Neshek arrived in St. Louis last offseason on a minor league contract and has made a huge impression, backing up his tiny 0.78 ERA in 46 1/3 innings with 9.5 K/9 and 1.2 BB/9.


Leave a Reply

135 Comments on "NL Notes: Hamels, Bastardo, Alderson, Neshek"


schaddy24
1 year 22 days ago

Please Theo, make this happen. Possibly a deal centered around Addison Russell?

Chris Lattier
1 year 22 days ago

I wouldn’t give up Russell now for just about anything.

Dan
1 year 22 days ago

I wouldn’t want to give up Russell either..but will take a talent or 2 like him to get it done. Baez/Almora/Vogelbach/Corey Black. You aren’t going to get a guy like Hamels unless you include at least one of the premium guys

schaddy24
1 year 22 days ago

“You aren’t going to get a guy like Hamels unless you include at least one of the premium guys”.

That’s why I suggested Russell. I figured Baez was out since he’s in the majors. Bryant is out because… well, it’s Bryant. Soler is on a major league contract, so he wouldn’t clear waivers. Russell is the only true top guy that could get it done. As much as we all like Almora, I doubt he’s enough to be the centerpiece in a deal that lands us a long-term ace.

Chris Lattier
1 year 22 days ago

Yeah, RA will probably want Russell…but I just don’t think it makes sense to move him now…Hamels is awesome, there is no denying that — I just think Hoyer put in the claim to see what it would take, will probably try and offer less than what RA wants and no deal will likely take place.

Dan
1 year 22 days ago

I agree. I think Hoyer would rather keep the prospects and see if he can sign a FA SP or 2 this offseason…and if he cant..then deal from the farm

schaddy24
1 year 22 days ago

I agree. The chances of a deal are very slim. If something happens, Russell would need to be included IMO, but that’s a huge price to pay. I guess we will find out by tomorrow night.

One benefit of waiver trades is the time restriction. It forces something to happen quickly, thus saving fans the mental anguish :)

gaius marius
1 year 22 days ago

you can’t think like that as a GM. Russell has a worth and value — probably around $40mm if the signings of unrestricted prospects like Abreu are indicative — and any package you’re offered that nets you that in value in return should be done.

problem is, Hamels is paid $22mm a year, generated 4-5 WAR, is on the wrong side of 30 and so won’t be better than he is now, and so likely generates only ~$5mm of value the rest of his deal. he’s simply not objectively worth one Russell.

if the Phillies pick up half of Hamels’ remaining contract, or a third of it and take Edwin Jackson in return, then you could ship Russell in good conscience.

but the Phillies asked for utterly crazy talent in return for Hamels at the deadline and don’t have to deal. so don’t expect too much.

Cubs44
1 year 22 days ago

That is to much for hamels. Probably a package centered around Almora and 2 other prospects.

schaddy24
1 year 22 days ago

I would certainly prefer that, but I doubt that Almora is enough to be the centerpiece of a trade this big.

Gersh
Gersh
1 year 22 days ago

You got Russell for a worse pitcher than Hamels, I don’t think that is too much.

Cubs44
1 year 22 days ago

From a cubs standpoint it would be. They traded two guys having the best year they have ever had for Russell. A deal won’t get done bc Ruben will want the cubs best guys but they won’t give it up. The cubs most likely put a claim in to see what it would take to get him.

schaddy24
1 year 22 days ago

From a Philly fan perspective, would the deal below interest you?

Addison Russell
Billy McKinney
Dan Vogelbach
Jacob Hannemann

Bryant is off limits. Soler would need to clear waivers (which wouldn’t happen).

gaius marius
1 year 22 days ago

the pitchers we gave up were controlled salary guys delivering value. Hamels gets paid at market rates and, good as he is, delivers very little economic value. in terms of business, Hamels just isn’t worth what Samardzija and Hammel were.

if the Phils eat a bunch of Hamels’ contract, then sure. but unless they do that, they aren’t getting a top ten prospect for him. the Cubs aren’t a contender.

cubs7691
1 year 22 days ago

But Lester

Ruben Diaz
1 year 22 days ago

The cubs eats most of the contract and give them Almora and couple C prospects :DealDone: ?

bigbadjohnny
1 year 22 days ago

Phillies eat most of the contract or lose Hammels all together the next time.

stl_cards16
1 year 22 days ago

Hammels doesn’t pitch for the Phillies. And there won’t be a next time for Hamels.

NotCanon
1 year 21 days ago

Someone doesn’t know how revocable waivers work.

ray1
1 year 22 days ago

Not sure if Amaro will know what to do in this situation.

machinegunkelly
1 year 22 days ago

If I’m Ruben, any conversation has to start with kris bryant, even if that means eating some salary

bigbadjohnny
1 year 22 days ago

yes…it ends with Bryant.

machinegunkelly
1 year 22 days ago

That’s fine, then. Phils should just pull him back off waivers and wait until the offseason when they can involve other teams. He is the one guy on that team that you have to get value for.

bigbadjohnny
1 year 22 days ago

If it is the Cubs who claimed Hammel……none of the Cubs shortstops are in play…….more like Almora and maybe a minor league pitcher or two…….Beeler & Zastryzny.

bigbadjohnny
1 year 22 days ago

Here is the thing……if Hammels is pulled, the next time he is exposed to waiver wire, Phillies get nothing.

stl_cards16
1 year 22 days ago

They won’t put him on waivers again this year. Pretty easy to do.

cscd1111
1 year 22 days ago

Chicago fans unless your GM gives up 3 or 4 top prospects a trade for Cole Hamels is highly unlikely.

Scott Berlin
1 year 22 days ago

If they want all top prospects they’d have to eat some salary. The only teams with that many prospects really don’t have the payroll space for that or don’t have an urgent need for Hamels. The Phillies won’t trade anyone unless they bring down their demands.

cubs7691
1 year 22 days ago

That aint gonna happen lol. Hamels is 30 and has a huge contract. Price has a good contract (less years) and is 28. All it took Detroit was Franklin and Smyly. So yeah no 3 or 4 prospects for you.

dylanp5030
1 year 22 days ago

Price doesn’t have a contract. He’s a FA after next year in which he will make about 2-3 million less than Hamels and then way more than Hamels from 2016 on…

cubs7691
1 year 22 days ago

So I wait a year pay more and keep my prospects? I’d rather go that route

dylanp5030
1 year 22 days ago

I wasn’t saying that’s not the right move for the Cubs, just stating your statement is inaccurate. If you’re worried about a huge contract, you should probably stay away from Price who may get 180 million on the open market.

gaius marius
1 year 22 days ago

that’s the thing, though — Price is controlled through 2015. he’s going to put up a lot of value between now and then for the Tigers.

Hamels is already being paid so much for the work he does that he has no real value over the four years. you might just as well go sign Lester or Scherzer in free agency. same thing.

the only way Hamels becomes worth a big prospect is 1) if the Phils eat ~$40mm of the $96mm he’s owed, or 2) they find a team in the window to win a title that is desperate to win right now and willing to hurt themselves long run to help themselves this year.

dylanp5030
1 year 22 days ago

I feel like Hamels may be one of the most underrated pitchers in baseball after reading some of these comments.

cubs7691
1 year 22 days ago

You sound just like your GM lol

dylanp5030
1 year 22 days ago

Ruben deserves a lot if grief for overvaluing his players. It has cost multiple chances at getting some talent back. That being said, i don’t think his value of Hamels is one to criticize. People are valuing prospects more than ever, and I get it. But people are suggesting that the Phillies need to eat a ton of money to get one top prospect. That is insane.

Hamels is a top 10-12 pitcher in baseball and is in his prime on a market deal. He is extremely valuable to a lot of clubs (including Phillies). Why would phillies force a deal just to get an okay prospect? Makes zero sense.

Ruben Diaz
1 year 22 days ago

Nah if it is for that, Theo signs lester in FA and conserve the farm.

rct
1 year 22 days ago

Why would they trade 3 or 4 prospects and pay Hamels a ton of money when they could just sign Lester for a ton of money in the offseason and keep the prospects? Philly is not dealing from a position of strength here.

bagpipes5
1 year 22 days ago

Because $$$$$$$$$. Hamels has cost certainty at $90M. You would have him for 5 post seasons. If Homer Bailey just signed for $105 M. Kershaw $215 M What is Lester/Scherzer going to be worth in Novemeber? Much much more than Cole Hamels $90 M..

gaius marius
1 year 22 days ago

going rate of WAR is about $6mm in free agent market, though. Hamels generates about 4 WAR a year for the next four, declining as he gets older — he’s worth about what he’s getting paid. zero surplus value for the team.

Kershaw, on the other hand, is just 26 and coming into his prime, and already puts up 6 WAR seasons. he’s worth $36mm a year for what he does. and he’s going to be paid about $31mm per. that means — even with the contract — he’s going to represent $5mm a year in value.

Bailey is 28 and puts up ~3 WAR seasons. he’s worth about $18mm a year. the deal he signed pays him $91mm over five years — about $15mm per. that works out to $3mm surplus value for the team.

you can’t forget that Hamels is getting paid $22.5mm a year. it eats up all his surplus value, and makes it really hard to move him for anything like value in return unless you eat some of the contract.

Christopher Velez
1 year 22 days ago

Hamels’ surplus value comes from only a four-year commitment: The alternative is signing Lester, Scherzer, or Shields this off-season for 6 or 7 years, at a comparable of greater AAV. Hamels may be making roughly market rate (though that’d always debateable, given the small sample sizes available for contracts to Top 10-15 in MLB pitchers), but the distinct lack of probable dead-years at the end of the contract is what makes him attractive enough to part with young talent.

cscd1111
1 year 22 days ago

The Phillies probable won’t move Hamels period unless someone completely over pays as far as Lester good luck.

machinegunkelly
1 year 22 days ago

Plus the cubs will have to compete with other teams for Lester and it is far from a guarantee that they will sign him.

rct
1 year 22 days ago

I didn’t say it was a guarantee, but they could overpay Lester and keep the prospects and come out way further ahead simply because Hamels makes so much money.

new coach
1 year 22 days ago

Phils are in a positon of srength as they can afford his contract and he may be good to have in 2017 anyhow when their big contracts start to come off payroll

rct
1 year 22 days ago

I don’t understand how this puts the Phillies in a position of strength. They can afford Hamels contract, but few other teams can. Whether or not the Phillies can afford it is irrelevant, it’s whether they can find a team who will take him on. Cubs aren’t a win now team, so there would be no reason for them to trade for him. Pursue Lester in the offseason. Even if you can’t get him, there are other pitchers to sign (Scherzer is another) or trade for. Phillies are not in a position of strength.

timpa
1 year 22 days ago

Because #1) There’s no guarantee Lester signs there. Other teams are going to be after him.

#2) The “ton” of money used to get Lester will be more than the “ton” of money to get Hamels. Phils had already said they’d kick in $10m and that is probably negotiable upwards. That makes Hamels a $20m or less a year pitcher with 4 guaranteed years remaining. Lester is not signing with the Cubs for 4/$80m.

I think Lester is going to be at least 5/$100m with a 6th year option to leave Boston. If he gives a ‘hometown discount’ and returns it could be less, but I think a team is going to have to BLOW HIM AWAY to get him to not return.

rct
1 year 22 days ago

Of course there’s no guarantee to sign Lester. Cole Hamels is essentially on a 5 year $110MM deal right now.

Even if they signed Lester for 5 years and $120MM, they could do that and not have to give up the ‘3 or 4 top prospects’ that the OP is asking for. Like I said, Philly is not dealing from a position where they can demand 3 or 4 of the Cubs’s top prospects.

Jeff Snedden
1 year 21 days ago

Perhaps the Cubs think Cole Hamels is a better pitcher? Or perhaps they feel that Cole Hamels is a better pitcher for their team? Just going out and signing big-money free agents to do it without considering how they fit into your franchise, or considering the type of personality/character/etc. is how teams get into bad situations. The teams that carefully choose players and don’t just give out $100 million deals because they can are the teams that ultimately win championships. History is littered with the carcases of teams that thought just spending $100 million more than everyone else would instantly make them hoist a trophy.

rct
1 year 21 days ago

So. . .then why would the Cubs add a $100MM pitcher (Hamels) and give up 3 or 4 of their top prospects? You’re making my argument for me whether you realize it or not.

slyfox1908
1 year 22 days ago

Why would the Cubs trade their 30-year-old ace for a top prospect, then turn around and trade that top prospect for a 30-year-old ace?

stl_cards16
1 year 22 days ago

Because they’d be trading for an actual Ace. A trade isn’t going to happen. The Cubs put in a claim just in case they could get a good deal by taking on his contract.

machinegunkelly
1 year 22 days ago

Because samardzija isn’t an ace and hamels is

paqza
1 year 19 days ago

Hamels is much better and has been much better for far longer than Samardzija.

bigbadjohnny
1 year 22 days ago

Here is the thing…….Phillies GM is not going to get anything for his players……the guy is on the way out, and all the other GM’s will play hard ball with him………..so if it is the Cubs who put the claim on Hamels, then you take what is offer……..or pull Hamels off the waiver wire and get less in the off season.

Gersh
Gersh
1 year 22 days ago

I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t get less in the offseason for Hamels.

stl_cards16
1 year 22 days ago

Saying “Here is the thing…” before your posts does not make them more accurate. Hamels will have just as much value in 3 months as he has now.

timpa
1 year 22 days ago

I actually think he’ll have more value in 3 months(barring an injury) because right now the Phillies can only negotiate with one single team (likely, but not officially confirmed to be the Cubs)

I also think once you see the guaranteed money that Lester & Scherzer sign for. The Phillies offering Hamels at 4/$80m(by kicking in money) with a 5th year option will look much more appealing.

Those guaranteed 5th/6th/7th years added on to deals may not look like too big of a deal. But when you’re talking about $20m+ salaries that’s at least 15% of the payroll of a team with $150m in salaries and there’s not too many of them out there. Phillies could make Hamels years and salary appealing enough to a team with an even lower payroll as well.

cubs7691
1 year 22 days ago

Let us refer to the David Price trade

machinegunkelly
1 year 22 days ago

Different deal. Price is an expiring contract and likely to test the market at the end of the year. Hamels has a deal in place for the next five years that will likely be much more affordable than price and the phillies are willing to eat money. You also risk that you come up empty handed in your pursuit of price in free agency and then you are left empty handed

The_Painter
1 year 22 days ago

Price has one more year left of arbitration…

machinegunkelly
1 year 22 days ago

Yep, you’re right., I don’t know why I thought he was a fa at the end of the year.

Still though, he isn’t signed to a long term deal and can be lost in a year. The phillies still have more leverage in trading hamels than the rays did with price.

gaius marius
1 year 22 days ago

except that Hamels gets paid $22.5mm for all four remaining years, which means that he doesn’t represent value. if you can go out and sign Lester or Scherzer to the same rate and keep all your kids, why wouldn’t you do that?

Hamels is a great pitcher, but he’s not going to command big prospects because he gets paid everything he’s worth already. No value in, no value out for the Phils.

cubs7691
1 year 22 days ago

Exactly. Great pitcher but not worth the price

DickieThong
1 year 22 days ago

Yeah, but he’s already making $14MM this year which would only have gone up in his final arb year. Tampa’s payroll this year is $81MM including that $14MM. They could not afford him going forward.

The_Painter
1 year 22 days ago

They could afford him the rest of the year, avoided arbitration with him next year and simply traded him this off-season, and possibly gotten a better deal that didn’t seem rushed.

bigbadjohnny
1 year 22 days ago

What I am hearing the most around the league is that many GM’s wish they had a farm system like the Cubs have now.
Here comes the “Big Blue Machine” for the next 15 years.

stl_cards16
1 year 22 days ago

Replace Cubs with Royals and this exact post could have been made 4 years ago.

bigbadjohnny
1 year 22 days ago

but Royals did not have Theo & Jed.

ubercubsfan
1 year 22 days ago

There ju$t $eem$ to be $omething different between the Royals and the Cub$…

Revery
1 year 22 days ago

Not quite the same level. Better comparison is probably the early 1990’s Cleveland Indians: Manny, Thome and company.

stl_cards16
1 year 22 days ago

The Royals were in a discussion of best farm system of all time.

Revery
1 year 22 days ago

Missed my point. There is always a best farm system. That is the nature of rankings. Royals were #1 overall in 2010 (I think). That crop just does not compare to the current Cubs system. One should think historically, past recent memory, when comparing this Cubs system to others.

over101
1 year 22 days ago

The Royals had 3 in the Top 10. That does very easily compare. And yes, there WAS crazy hype for that farm system.

DippityDoo
1 year 22 days ago

If I was a GM and I saw how bad RA was botching things, knowing he probably knows his job is on the line soon, no way I give him any kind of a deal, let him get desperate and make a stupid deal to help my team.

1 year 22 days ago

I don’t want them to trade the top level prospects it would take to get Hamels. At this point, I’d wait for the offseason and sign a top free agent pitcher. The salary cost will be the same, they won’t have to give up a Russell or Bryant, and even their draft pick is protected, so they won’t lose that either. I can see why they put the claim in, but I don’t expect this to go anywhere.

tune-in for baseball
1 year 22 days ago

You can probably get Shields for the same money but not Scherzer or Lester. So the question would be is he a better value ($$$ plus prospect/ ML player) vs. a FA. Guess it depends on who the player is and how much you value having him locked down now vs. getting into a bidding war in FA.

bigbadjohnny
1 year 22 days ago

okay, we can all relax now……Phillies will not trade Hamels to the Cubs according to Philadelphia reports………..Cubs were on the Hamels “No Trade List”…….Hamels wants to play only for the Red Sox, Dodgers, Angels, Nationals, Cardinals, Braves, Rangers, Padres or Yankees.

Gersh
Gersh
1 year 22 days ago

Where are you coming up with this stuff? We don’t even know that the Cubs are the team that claimed Hamels, and the teams that aren’t on the NTC aren’t necessarily the only teams he wants to play for.

bigbadjohnny
1 year 22 days ago

look at Dave Kaplan reports at CSN Comcast sports.

Gersh
Gersh
1 year 22 days ago

All he said was it would be a long shot, still we don’t even know the Cubs claimed Hamels.

ubercubsfan
1 year 22 days ago

I don’t see anything about Hamels saying no as of yet. Not saying he won’t, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he OK’d the deal if the Cubs guarantee 2019’s year at 24MM. Thus making his remaining contract from ’15-’19 114MM/5yr instead of 90MM/4yr with possible vest.

bagpipes5
1 year 22 days ago

Imo Hamels would veto trade to Cubs. Hamels wants to go to an immediate contender Angels/Dodgers/Oak etc…If he could he would switch teams on his no trade list e.g. Bos/Tex with Oakland/Baltimore, he would.

The Cubs might be on the track with a bright future but Hamels wants to win Now.

bigbadjohnny
1 year 22 days ago

Other Pitchers who want to win now and not later …….Lester, Shields, Scherzer…..
When the Cubs start to win……every major league pitcher and their mother will want to jump on the Bandwagon when the Cubs win that World Series.

1 year 22 days ago

They must do it :)

new coach
1 year 22 days ago

phils wont dump Cole for nothing. With many big salaries coming off the books in 2016, shedding payroll isnt required. No reason they couldnt reload for a run in 2017 . Nola, their top pick from this year may be up next season (in AA now and doing well).

new coach
1 year 22 days ago

to clarify- I think they could be decent in 2017, with a starting rotation of Cole/Nola/Biddle/?/? and adding Crawford, Quinn, Franco to the majors and then making good (which may not be their forte) FA signings the next few years. Wont be a top team but will be heading in the right direction

bigbadjohnny
1 year 22 days ago

If the Phillies want to trade Hamels in the off season, please refer what the return package was for David Price, who is a much better pitcher then Hamels.

DickieThong
1 year 22 days ago

They traded him because they couldn’t afford him going forward. Totally different scenarios.

Gersh
Gersh
1 year 22 days ago

I don’t fully agree with your statement saying Price is a much better player than Hamels.

dylanp5030
1 year 22 days ago

You are comparing apples to oranges.

Jeff Miller
1 year 22 days ago

4 years of Cole Hamels at $90M w/ an option is worth far more than 14-months of David Price at around $25M, especially when you factor in post-season success and pitching in a large market.

jeremy
1 year 22 days ago

if cubs got him what would it cost would they use Addison Russell in a trade since they have a surplus in IF depth

ubercubsfan
1 year 22 days ago

No, there is a reason to stock pile SS prospects. They can be converted to play almost anywhere. The requirements to be a good SS are much higher than to be a 2B or 3B. So, if the Cubs were to make a trade, you wouldn’t really see any top prospects going from the Cubs unless the Phillies want to eat a TON of money in return.

jeremy
1 year 22 days ago

that is true plus if needed one of the IF could be a OF since cubs could use a OF. then who knows what a trade would be if cubs had a chance to get him

ubercubsfan
1 year 22 days ago

Example right now is Alcantara. He was a SS, converted to 2B when Baez got to Iowa, then they put him in CF when Baez went to 2B in Iowa. SS can play almost anywhere since they have the tools to field the position. Now hitting for said position, that’s a whole different story.

stl_cards16
1 year 22 days ago

I agree, but SS’ s are very hard to find. So if the Cubs do indeed end up with a surplus, trading them to fill other needs could provide more value to the Cubs than simply shifting a SS to an easier position. For now, I believe the Cubs are going to hold and see which prospects work out, then worry about filling the holes.

jeremy
1 year 22 days ago

cubs just had a ace and they traded him, i guess they want a more proven ace. not a bad idea to add with all that talent they have in the minors

bigbadjohnny
1 year 21 days ago

last Ace Cubs had was named Maddux

Frank Richard
1 year 21 days ago

Wood, Prior, Zambrano, Lieber, were all considered aces.