TODAY: Chicago allowed Hammel to decide whether he’d be back for one more year or test the market, according to ESPNChicago.com’s Jesse Rogers. That was no doubt an easy call for him, at least financially.
YESTERDAY: The Cubs have declined right-hander Jason Hammel’s $12MM option for 2017 in favor of a $2MM buyout, according to a team announcement. Hammel is now a free agent.
The World Series champions’ decision to cut the reasonably priced Hammel comes as a surprise, as he at least looked like a trade candidate prior to Sunday. However, president of baseball operations Theo Epstein announced that the team had no plans to pick up Hammel’s option just to shop him.
“The intent was never to exercise the option and then trade Jason, so we will not consider that path,” said Epstein. “Instead, Jason will have the opportunity to enter free agency coming off an outstanding season and the ability to choose his next club.”
Hammel, 34, contributed 166 2/3 innings of 3.83 ERA pitching to go with a 7.78 K/9, 2.86 BB/9 and 42.1 percent ground-ball rate in 2016. He experienced elbow tightness late in the regular season, though, and the club subsequently left him off its roster during playoff victories over the Giants, Dodgers and Indians.
This ends Hammel’s second stint with the Cubs, who signed him to a one-year contract entering the 2014 season and then sent him and Jeff Samardzija to Oakland in a July deal that brought shortstop Addison Russell to Chicago. Hammel subsequently returned to the Windy City in free agency the next winter, ultimately collecting $20MM from the team on what would have been a three-year, $30MM pact had the Cubs exercised his option.
For Hammel’s earning power, the Cubs’ move to buy him out comes at a fortuitous time. Given the weakness of this winter’s free agent class, he’ll return to the open market as one of the top starters available. Going back to 2014, Hammel has logged a 3.68 ERA, 8.3 K/9, 2.4 BB/9 and 40 percent grounder mark over 513 2/3 innings.
Barring offseason acquisitions, the Cubs’ removal of Hammel from their roster will leave them with Jon Lester, Jake Arrieta, Kyle Hendricks, John Lackey and Mike Montgomery as their starting five entering 2017. That quintet should form one of the majors’ premier rotations next season if healthy, though the Cubs’ depth took an obvious hit with Hammel’s exit.
You could tell this was coming. Not being active at all was a sure sign. However trading him wasn’t an option? Should be able to get something for a 16 game winner
The Cubs posted a statement on their Twitter that states “When we agreed with Jason on this two year contract back at the 2014 winter meetings, the option was included with the intent that it would be exercised if Jason was going to be a Cub in 2017. The intent was never to exercise the option and then trade Jason, so we will not consider that path. Instead, Jason will have the opportunity to enter free agency coming off an outstanding season and the ability to choose his next club.”
I guess it’s somewhat of a classy move. I’m not sure they would’ve gotten that much in the first place, but can’t they tag him with a qualifying offer now if they wanted to?
They can give him a QO but he would take it in a second, I think. If the Cubs don’t want to pay him 12MM they definitely don’t want to pay him 17MM
Yeah that’s true. I stopped thinking after I couldn’t remember if they could tag him or not. Thanks for letting me know though.
I don’t think he’d take it… most of these guys, especially pitchers value years and total value over AAV. 3/45 – which would actually be a bargain in this market – would surpass 1-17
I get the point, although if they had an agreement with Hammel not to exercise the option if their goal was to trade him, then honoring it is not a classy move. It’s what should be expected.
Exactly. A classy deal and they kept there word
How is keeping your word considered classy?
There was no agreement between the sides on this. The Cubs were classy in honoring the “spirit” of the option. They could’ve traded him easily, forcing him to play in a place he didn’t want to play, at a below-market salary that agreed to only because he wanted to give the Cubs a discount.
Get that “16 game winner” out of here! Pitcher wins and losses are irrelevant.
Here’s two pitching lines:
175 IP. 186 Hits allowed. 46 Walks. 90 Strikeouts. 4.17 ERA
201 IP. 183 Hits allowed. 67 Walks. 233 Strikeouts. 4.02 ERA.
The first line is Willie Blair, 1997. He went 16-8
The second is Chris Archer, 2016. He went 9-19.
Which pitcher do you want on your team?
Pitcher wins are totally meaningless.
You would rather have Archer, but you do want your pitchers to win games instead of lose them. A pitcher’s win is a win for the team and same with pitcher losses.
Archer didn’t lose those games, the team did. Same with Blair. Give Chris Archer the 1997 Tigers’ offense and he’ll win more games than Willie Blair did that year.
And if a pitcher gives up only 1 or 2 runs and his team fails to score, is that his fault? No. Wins/Losses can be useful but only if taken into consideration with other stats. It’d be easy for a pitcher to win 15 plus games if his team is scoring 4 or more runs a game while it would be just as hard for a pitcher to get the win if his team can’t score.
But the point is that really good pitchers – even the best, have very little control over their teammates and the game outcomes. Look up Anthony Young’s 1-19 season sometime. His ERA that year was 3.77. His peripherals weren’t anything special – 103 hits allowed in 100 innings, 34 Bb, 62 Ks. Bad luck happens. Sometimes in extraordinary measures. In the end though, I’ll take the better pitcher every time. Blair was a bad pitcher. He lucked into those wins. He never remotely pitched well after that season.
Why would they do this? Montgomery has never been a better starter than relief pitcher and there is no guarantee that Lackey will stay healthy last year…started looking his age late in the year and in the playoffs.
Because its really obvious they are going to get a SP on the FA or trade market, that’s why they did it.
There has to be a trade coming at some point, we can’t seriously go into next year with Schwarber,Zobrist,Almora,Heyward,Soler and Sczur.
My guess is that Soler + a prospect will be traded for a pitcher, my guess either Odorizzi or Smyly
Sox get Schwarber, Almora or Baez, and Carl Edwards JR, in return for Chris Sale.
Even after they win the WS we’re still going to act like the Cubs are going to get rid of Baez and Schwarber? JFC
If the cubs didn’t give up an injured Schwarber for Andrew Miller then i don’t think they will trade him for Sale. I think they will trade Soler for a back end of the rotation arm, like Odorizzi.
@Nola
White Sox will not accept no less than 5 top prospects in any Sale proposal. Especially when the team that proposing the deal is your crosstown rival that has just won the World Series. Try again.
The white sox laugh at that offer. And, I’m a cub fan.
If the Cubs want sale the acquisition cost in trade will sting. Something like schwarber Baez and another small minor league piece.
Odorizzi is 26, started 33 games last year and is someone that can be counted on to pitch 190+ inning moving forward. He had ERA+’s of 110 and 117. the prior two seasons. He’d likely also benefit moving from the AL East to the DH-less NL. He has upside from what he’s already shown. That is not a backend starter. Not even close. He’s already mid-rotation material, and could be a solid #2 moving forward. Likely is based on skill.
Being an out-of-market (not living in Chicago) fan, what is the likelihood the White Sox and Cubs would make a deal like that? I know in NY, we’d never see Harvey traded to the Yankees, even if a deal made sense for both sides. Would the level of resistance be the same?
I would rather have Soler and Hammel than Odorizzi… Better to deal Soler for a prospect (De Leon? Yohander Mendez?) or a high-end reliever (Diaz?). Or package for a stud like Sale or Archer.
Here we go again…. did you copy and paste that comment from last off season?
No.
What is Soler worth right now? I keep waiting for him to break out but the longer we go the less he is worth.
Soler doesn’t carry much weight at all might be a centerpiece in a Smyley type deal but the books out just like it is on Puig but Puig can play defensively. Soler does not even get DeLeon or Mendez. Diaz isn’t getting trading and the phone would be hung up the centerpiece of a Sale or Archer deal starts with Soler. Stop overvaluing your prospects/players.
There is NO WAY the cubs will entertain that trade offer. Why would they want Chris sale anyway? He’s a malcontent. Baez is a future star and Schwarber has limitless potential.
Odorizzi is more than a back of the rotation starter.
Soler has value. Hes young (24?) With great power and a keen eye at the plate. I believe hed succeed more in the AL with the DH in play. Is he worth a top 50 prospect? Probably not. A few talented A ballers as the cubs need more pitching in the minor leagues. Solers contract is also team friendly assuming he plays
I would disagree. Hammel is just “ok” at best and Soler cannot stay off of the DL plus the log jam in the outfield. Odorizzi could provide a solid 5th Starter option if the job doesn’t go to Montgomery.
As great as Sale is he plays once every 5 days. Baez is not going to be traded to anyone for anyone. He is simply too valuable to the club long term.. Almora and Edwards doesn’t get that deal done if I’m the White Sox. Not even close. And Almora is going to be an every day player if Fowler does not return anyway. Schwarber for Sale is possible but not with Edwards. The Cubs would have to give more than just Schwarber, but it wouldn’t be a key piece of the current team. It would be prospects – with an “s”. Sale is controlled for the next three years. And he is just 27. To me the best chip the Cubs have to trade is Schwarber. And I think I’d be looking for multiple pitchers with upside in a trade for him to an AL team.
No way is Sale worth two every day, cost controlled MLB players like Schwarber and Baez plus another minor leaguer. This past summer when the leverage was higher than the offseason the Sox wanted three solid prospects plus another minor leaguer for him. HIs value is great and he is tied up for three more years. But he is not worth two cost controlled everyday studs plus a minor leaguer. You could probably get him for Happ, Jimenez and Almora though. Or Schwarber and a really solid prospect. If I’m the Cubs I am shopping Schwarber as the cornerstone of a trade like this. Great hitter, great character. Has no home as a defensive player and has a lot of value on the market.
I don’t even know where to begin with your notion Puig is in the same position as Soler. Puig is arbitration eligible in 2019 and an UFA in 2020. Puig is going to make north of 7MM next year and more than 9MM in 2018. Soler is locked up for less than 5MM a season through 2020. Puig is a clubhouse plague. The notion Soler can’t play defense is enhanced because he sits behind a gold glover. The guy is a decent defender. And he also isn’t a plague. And he’s cost controlled on the cheap. All those things make him worth a lot more than Puig on the trade market. I do agree he is not the cornerstone for a front line starter. But your analysis is just way off because you don’t look at all the factors.
Odorizzi will cost a lot more than an unproven commodity in soler and a prospect. Cubs farm is basically all up on the big league squad. Will take more in a scarce pitching market this offseason to land better arms.
Soler has little trade value he would be the 3rd or 4th piece in a big trade. Theo and company could likely get more in a trade bc they always seem to make out like bandits
The vibe I’m getting is Schwarber is off limits. Look at his stats… and he’s only played in like 74 big league games.
I agree Theo love Schwarber, how many game do they play with a DH during the season. He is a perfect DH. They should have a DH in both leagues. You don’t take a kicker in football and ask him to run the ball, and add to that they only hit once a week. Take your position players and have them hit once a week and see how well they do. Do they even let them take batting pactice every day? The answer is no, this is a joke!
Has to be a trade you could make a case that Hammel is now best sp on the free agent market
He cannot pitch post allstar games well. He runs out of gas in the 2nd half of the season. So whats the point of keeping a guy like that? Especially at his price, you can find someone else.
Just because he struggled post all star this year, he is going to do it every time? Hire this dude as your GM!
Point is they could have at least gotten pieces in trades for him given the thin pitching market and the value of pitchers as a whole, but instead they decided to play the nice guys and turn that into just a buyout fee…in what planet is that not a bad business move?
He didn’t just struggle this past season. He’s struggled in the 2nd half of seasons for the past 3 seasons now. It’s not like I’m basing it off of one season. That’d be ludicrous. He has fatigue issues, clearly. He runs out of gas. Even this season when Maddon limited his pitching in the 1st half, he still blew up in the 2nd half. Thus he didn’t make the postseason roster. He just isn’t that great honestly.
I guess the point about him still having good enough trade value went way over your head. He still gave you an ERA of under 4 for all those 3 years averaging 30 starts. So obviously his overall production was good enough for the Cubs to at least get something back in this thin pitching market.
Because Hammell’s not all that good anyways and Montgomery’s making chicken feed compared to him?
The Cubs want to clear as much payroll space as possible because they’ll need to either extend Arrieta or sign another front line starter soon
I think the only way the could extened Arrieta is if Heyward opt’s out of his contract after next season.
I don’t believe Heyward can opt out after 2017. His opt-out clauses are after 2018 and 2019, so he’s a Cub for at least two more seasons, maybe three. The deal is also frontloaded slightly. They have to pay him $28M next year. Seems the goal of the Cubs was to get 3 (or 4) highly productive years from Heyward, and then have him opt-out and have some other team pay for his 30s. That may still work out, but year one was disturbingly bad. If he repeats 2016, the Cubs will have one of the worst contracts, if not the worst, if MLB.
I thought he can opt out after two years, just like cueto
’18 and ’19 are the opt out years
But not paying Hammel next year would cover most of any raise they give Arrieta, allowing them to remain close to budget neutral, and if Montgomery can handle being a starter that’s a rotation spot they don’t have to fill from the outside, which gives them further flexibility
either way the Cubs are going to have to pay a front line starter a lot of money very soon, so might as well not commit to any payroll they don’t have to…. you never know when an opportunity will present itself. Cubs have plenty of trade bait still in the minors, and if they have the ability to eat salary too, that sets them up nicely if they need to make any trades.
not like they’re likely to regret not having Hammel anyways
@RobM Bobby Bonilla
They will not resign Jake Arrieta.
well, if you say so… thanks for taking all the suspense out of it
You can’t give $12M to a barely replacement-level starter.
You don’t have to (and he wasn’t … 1.5 fWAR). You pay a few million if you have to and trade him for something. In this pitching market that’s just not smart. The only thing I can think of is his elbow is shot, and anyone trying to trade for him would know that.
I doubt anyone would’ve given up much for him. He has one year left on his deal, he’s 34 years old. He’s proven the last 3 seasons that he cannot handle pitching in the 2nd half of the season. I’m sure if he had value Theo would’ve kept him.
Theo has been one of the best in the entire sport at evaluating value of a player. Of course he’s had a few blunders such as trading Vizcaino back to Atlanta for La Stella and signing Edwin Jackson, but I don’t think this qualifies as a mistake.
I still believe Theo signed Jackson so the league wouldn’t yell treason because the payroll in seasons 2011-2014 would be less than 10 million dollars
The Cubs opening day payroll (per Cot’s) stayed above $100 million from 2011 to 2013 and bottomed out at $93 million in 2014. The $93 million includes the portion of Soriano’s contract that the Cubs were still paying.
I think that part of Epstein’s idea with Jackson was having established starting pitching that could he flip to contenders for prospect value at the trade deadline, especially if any of the starters happened to overperform expectations in a particular year. It worked in some cases of signing free agent starting pitchers – Hammel, Feldman – but not with Jackson.
It’s still better than giving $12M to Jaime Garcia. I still don’t get what the Cardinals expect to get for him without eating half that salary.
Does seem like a bit of a surprise but the Cubs – and other teams – know his medicals better than us. Perhaps a trade wasn’t going to happen and better to cut their losses. Hammel had a pretty good season up until the injury. If he’s not significantly hurt he probably becomes the best starter on the FA market, right?
Gotta be his elbow. No other explanation.
You could explain it as a goodwill gesture to help make Chicago an even more attractive place for free agents to sign. Look at the starting pitching market, it’s sparce. He’s going to make quite a bit of money in free agency.
The elbow was my first thought. 1 year at $10 million is a good deal for a 1.5ish fWAR starting pitcher, but it’s not a great deal if the pitcher has serious health concerns.
Perhaps also a 40 man roster crunch in the offseason? Not sure who the Cubs need to put on the 40 man to protect from the rule 5 draft., but that could feed into not wanting to tie up $10 million on Hammel plus a roster spot that you can use elsewhere. Ties into the idea that Hammel may have health concerns, so you’re using the roster spot on a guy who still requires that you also roster a backup plan.
He will most likely latch on with a two year deal somewhere. Especially with the shortage of good SPs. Maybe Yankees or Padres pick him up.
Who will fill in his spot in the rotation, he was amazing if you consider him a 5th starter
Montgomery gets first crack
The first step to the destruction of the best team in Cubs history. Hammel aint great but as solid a #5 starter as you’ll find. Now I guess its on unproven Montgomery
That’s a stupid thought no one entertain this guy. Marlins should pick hammels up tho.
Montgomery is good. He’ll get the first shot for sure. They’ll sign some depth piece too – maybe Edinson Volquez makes sense given the Cubs fantastic defense and his groundball tendencies.
Volquez will get at least as much as Hammel would have cost, if not more. So very unlikely this will happen. They could have just kept Hammel.
Montgomery would probably be one of the best 5th starters in the game, I bet.
Don’t the Cubs have 6 pitchers in their top 10 prospect rankings? Anybody from within that can get a shot?
No they are all way to far away.
I found it surprising considering it was a $10 million decision. But with Montgomery and Grimm who has long expressed the desire for a shot at the rotation, on the 25 man already and Zastryzny, Johnson on the 40 man, and all the other unknown options out there I could see how they feel they could better spend that 10 million, might be enough to get Wood back for 2 years… Lots of options to have some flexibility.
Classy move by Epstein, as GMs don’t always follow their verbal or handshake agreements when business is affected. However, the names you listed show some alarmingly shallow pitching depth on the North Side. Cubs need some starter depth badly.
Rather surprised! He easily joins Nova and Hellickson as the 2-4th best starters on the market, with Hill only just ahead of them. As long as his elbow is not shot!
Yikes. That says a lot about the state of the free agent pitching market this offseason. Not that he can’t help a team, but I suspect he’s going to become pricey.
With a free agent pitching market highlighted by Rich Hill, Jeremy Helickson, Colby Lewis, CJ Wilson, and Jared Weaver, now is the best time for both Jason Hammel and Travis Wood to test the free agent market, and come out better than they would otherwise.
I don’t get this move. The Cubs could do a lot worse than paying a guy who just posted 167 innings of 3.83 ERA ball $10m for one year, especially in this year’s free agent market. Even if they don’t want him for 2017 he’d surely draw some trade interest.
The Cubs posted a statement on their Twitter that states “When we agreed with Jason on this two year contract back at the 2014 winter meetings, the option was included with the intent that it would be exercised if Jason was going to be a Cub in 2017. The intent was never to exercise the option and then trade Jason, so we will not consider that path. Instead, Jason will have the opportunity to enter free agency coming off an outstanding season and the ability to choose his next club.”
So either there wasn’t any trade interest, or they went the classier route.
Going to assume the latter. Most clubs probably would have picked up the option to try and trade him but good for the Cubs following through with their intent.
Looking at the big picture, it sends a very good message to future free agents. Hopefully Hammel can score a reasonable deal and continue his career as a solid rotation member.
That’s stupid. MLB is a business first. Hammel is easily worth more than $10m for one year so they are hurting their team by declining his option. If he didn’t want to get traded so much he should have gotten a no-trade clause.
Well Maddon said multiple times this year that Montgomery would be in the rotation or at least have a shot to be in it in 2017, so I guess it came down to saving 10mil, not spending time trying to trade Hammel when they could be upgrading another position/resigning someone else, and building up a reputation to give free agents more of a reason to want to come to Chicago.
Classy scmassy, it’s an option, they didn’t want to pick it up for some reason. Let’s see what the roster looks like going into the next season before we canonize the Cubs FO.
Between his salary and the $13M that they paid Edwin Jackson this year, they just cleared somewhere between $23-25M for one roster spot. Not that I think they believe in paying out the nose for a closer, but they certainly just added some cash to the pile (not that they needed it).
He did. They had agreement, even if it was verbal. They’re honoring it. That’s good business.
Yes, it’s a business and the cubs seemingly got Zobrist and Lackey to take below-market contacts because they wanted to play for the cubs. Reputation helps.
An option that would’ve allowed the Cubs to trade him anywhere in the league instead of Hammel choosing where he plays on a multi year deal for even more money, but yeah, classy scmassy.
It’s about what’s best for the Cubs and being able to trade Hammel is better than paying him $2m to go away.
Lol “reputation.”
Players clearly already want to sign with the Cubs already. Exercising Hammel’s option and then trading him wouldn’t have changed that. And they would have saved $10m anyway (and possibly more because they wouldn’t have to pay the buyout) if they had picked up Hammel’s option and traded him and they also would have gotten back something that might possibly help the team out down the road. MLB is a business first and declining Hammel’s option was not a good business decision.
No they didn’t. FIrst rule of business is “Always get it in writing.”
If they were to pick up Hammel’s option and then trade him, sure, it probably wouldn’t have hurt them at all, but sticking to their word only improves their reputation, whether they need it or not.
Somehow it’s a bad business decision to stick to their word, pay $2mil, and move on, rather than keep him and hope you can actually trade a guy who only pitches well during the first half because of durability issues, would’ve only netted a low prospect, and seemingly complains more than he’s worth.
I think this whole argument is being framed on the idea Hammel is completely healthy, and I have a feeling he isn’t. The Cubs know that, and unless AJ Preller is managing their injury database, every other team in baseball knows that too.
The MLB is indeed a business, but sometimes in business you give away a bit more because the optics (front offices love that term) are favorable. The Cubs are already known as a class organization and player friendly (e.g. they have some of the best family/spouse perks in the majors), but this provides another reason for a guy to choose them over another club if the money is close.
Theo is also a stand-up guy (if you believe what’s been written about him), so he is also following through on a handshake deal he had. Either way, the Cubs have the flexibility to make such a move and not really be worse off.
Once again, no player who was going to sign with the Cubs anyway would have changed their mind just because they exercised Hammel’s option and traded him, which really was the more prudent route. Hammel will get way more than $10m this offseason.
If they intended to give Hammel a choice on who he played for in 2017, they should have given him a mutual option, or just a straight up 2 year deal with no option.
And making your organization attractive to future free agents is good business. Theo/Jed did what they said they would do. Win a World Series. I think I would trust them going forward.
Lol you just keep going. Following through on their word didn’t hurt the team one bit, as I guarantee Montgomery will at least be a consistent contributor to the team throughout next year unlike First Half Hammel. They gave him the option for a situation just like this in which they acquired a younger, controllable starter thus having no need for Hammel. If they give him a mutual option and he decides he doesn’t want to play for Chicago, but the Cubs do end up needing him then wow look at that he’s leaving Chicago (if they need him there would be no Montgomery to replace him) and if they give him two years with no option, wow look at that they have him and they don’t need him, so he ends up getting traded for a low tier prospect in order to take him off their hands. Instead they give him a team option because he returned to Chicago after being traded to Oakland and tell him they’ll deny it, instead of trading him, if he isn’t going to be in their 2017 rotation, which allows him at least one more chance at a multi year deal, likely at a higher salary than what he would’ve gotten.
+ 1. I somewhat suspect that the next news we’ll hear about Hammel is a rumor that he’s agreed to a free agent deal, followed by the team backing out after a physical.
He’s a 34 year old back of the rotation pitcher who was shut down at the end of this season with an elbow problem. He probably has a market – depending on the severity of his health problem – but it may not actually be a north of $10 million market if he’s less than 100% healthy.
Will Hammel receive a World Series ring not being on the postseason roster?
He should. And he could have pitched for then in the playoffs. Maddon yanked him in the 4th or 5 ugh inning most of the season just like he did the rest of the rotation in the playoffs.
Yes. For example, Adam Warren will get a World Series ring (and a share) even though he was traded after 4 months. If you’re part of the team, you get a ring.
Yeah, everybody who played even an inning for them will get a ring. The players vote on the bonus share but everybody will get some of that too. Front office personnel get rings as well.
I see. Thanks for the answers.
Of course he will.
Yeah, Hammel will still get one.
There ya go braves
With Montgomery moving to the starting 5 I could see the Cubs going hard after Jansen and a lefty reliever. Maybe even 2 if they don’t resign Travis Wood.
After this postseason Maddon showed the front office that he wants a multi-inning closer which Chapman was not.
Really? A multi inning closer Chapman was not. How quickly we forget games 5 and 6 of the World Series. And of course, there are no multi inning closers in baseball–that’s just the function of playoff baseball. If Rondon and Strop didn’t spend most of the last two months on the DL the Cubs would have had a Royals like set up in the playoffs. Watching the Cubs all year, it was very evident that Rondon and Strop were nowhere near 100% down the stretch and in the playoffs. Hopefully, they return 100% and even if the Cubs don’t sign Chapman or Jansen, they will be just fine.
That’s silly. If Chapman is not a multi inning reliever, neither is Jansen. Just because the latter didn’t pitch enough for the workload to catch up with him, doesn’t mean people are going to lose their common sense and won’t see that it very easily can if you keep throwing him out there for multiple innings. Andrew Miller is better than both, and it even managed to catch up to him. Francona made it quite clear that you can’t use your pen like in the regular season with the amount of workload. Every team out there would likely take Chapman over Jansen to keep that draft pick.
Anyways, this is a bad move with the thin pitching market. It’s a nice guy move that benefits Hammel, but pretty bad from a business perspective for the Cubs. If Hammel has a good year in 2017, or one of the starters like Lackey or Montgomery struggles, which they very well can, Epstein only has himself to blame.
*pen like that in
What does everyone think about a Soler for Wade Davis deal? Throw ins, prospects? Cubs move Montgomery to rotation, lose Cahill, Wood and Chapman to Free Agency. Any Royals fans out there?
no way they move soler for a 1 year rental
They moved Torres,McKinney and Warren for 2 months of Chapman, though it looks like K.C. wants controllable pitching back for Davis anyways.
I think if they didn’t trade for Chapman , they don’t win the world series. I think the cubs make a run at resigning chapman, if not they go after melencon or jansen. Maybe trade for another pitcher like odorizzi
Deadlines deals and offseason trades are a little different, at least to me.
Now that the Cubs have their ring, I don’t see them making another overpay like they did for Chapman again. The Yankees definitely won that trade, but would the Cubs have won the World Series this year without Chapman? Tough to say.
The Cubs won the World Series. The Yankees, by definition, CANNOT win that trade. It may be a win-win trade. But after waiting 108 years for a title, the Cubs were definite winners in that trade.
You realize that had the Cubs not won game 7, Chapman would have been blamed, right?
No, Maddon would’ve shouldered the bulk of the blame for the way he used Chapman.
i dont think Soler is enough to be a centrepiece of a Wade Davis deal, they would surely ask for Schwarber or Baez + prospects, remember they asked for Giolito in summer before Davis went on the DL, talking to the Nationals.
Soler is no longer the centerpiece of any major deal. Especially considering the royals pride themselves on contact and defense. Soler granted is an intriguing kid but his centerpiece major deal days are gone. He’s more an interesting flyer with a contract that’s nice.
I find Hammel and Garcia to be similar in value and the cards have more rotation depth and they exercised his option.
We’ll see how this plays out
This is the perfect braves solution.
You’d think, but I bet there are 20+ other clubs out there with the same thoughts. I think in the end he’ll be too expensive for Atlanta’s tastes.
I think part of what they are doing is setting up next offseason as well. If they don’t replace him this year they might have to replace three SP’s next year with Lackey and Arrieta also being free agents.
Putting aside the issue of Hammel’s health (which,perhaps they have some insight into) it might indicate that Epstein did not expect to be able to make a trade where he would have received sufficient value to take the risk of agreeing to pay $12M (and potentially clogging up a roster spot, since Hammel isn’t really suited for the bullpen.)
It’s really not that bad of a decision. Just because the FA market is weak, doesn’t mean you should pick up a 12 million dollar option on your 5 starter. If you really wanted to, you could fill that with spot starts from some bullpen guys and Triple A pitchers, or throw a top of the rotation guy on 4 days of rest. It’s not like Chicago is starving for starters. See Hendricks, Kyle and Lester, Jon and Arrieta, Jake and Lackey, John. 12 million dollars is a lot. Think about what that can buy.
They can still be a dynasty. They are the main team in Chicago, so they can afford pitching in years to come. Not every free agent class will be so weak.
Decent pitcher. Maybe join the Mets as a long reliever/spot starter if he wants another ring? We’ll see how bad he wants to win by where he signs. Mets WS Champs 2017. Can’t wait to celebrate.
The mets have a surplus of pitchers…but needed every one of them last year. I’m still hoping they re-sign Bart though…purely bc I enjoy watching him, but it isn’t an area of need. They have far bigger problems CF/Ces/righty bat, another BP arm, and are iffy at catcher. The Mets can get similar production from Lugo/Gsellman for <10% of the cost. I think Hammel could land in MIA, NYY, or a few other clubs with a bunch of question marks in their rotations.
Orioles chance to bring back Hammel, hopefully have him become a stud again
This somewhat surprising move now makes the Cubs a more certain contender for any prized starting pitchers who may becomes available in trades this offseason, especially in light of a relatively weak free agent market for premium starters. This means the Cubs should be all over potential rotation upgrades like Chris Sale or Jose Quintana from the White Sox, Sonny Gray from the A’s and Chris Archer from the Rays, among others. The Cubs certainly have the quality young MLB ready pieces to pursue any one of those controllable rotation pieces.
Buying out Jason Hammel’s 2017 option might also be an indicator that the Cubs are ready to seriously negotiate a contract extension for Jake Arrieta who can become a free agent following the upcoming season.
they will wait to trade prospects for another starter
Wait for what reason?
The Cubs no longer have the “prospects” down on the farm they once possessed. Some of their best have been traded recently or are already on their MLB roster. The Cubs don’t have the minor league pieces to compete with other organizations for a premium young and controllable starter but they do possess many pre-arbitration eligible MLB ready pieces that would be especially enticing to a team like the White Sox.
Besides, it’s not like the Cubs have many starting pitching options down on the farm that are ready for prime time duty in 2017. Nor is the free agent market particularly strong for starters this offseason. The “release” of Jason Hammel is proof enough. He just became one of the more attractive options in free agency.
The Cubs will certainly be active in the pursuit of a controllable premium rotation arm this offseason to not only replace Hammel but as an insurance policy for Jake Arrieta should he depart as a FA after the upcoming season. It’s a “no-brainer” that the Cubs will be at the front of the line if and when Chris Sale, Jose Quintana, Sonny Gray, Chris Archer or any other comparably talented and controllable young starter is made available in the coming weeks and months.
Is this part of the 40 man roster shuffle in order to protect another player they want to protect?
It’s funny how sooooo many people are questioning Jed and Theo’s decision here. They break a 108 year drought and you people think you can do the job better. Lmao fools!!!!
Can we just appreciate how classy it was to buy him out rather than trade him. He’s a valuable asset which plenty of teams would love to have
I predict Travis Wood will get a better contract than Hammel. The only team he’s really had success with in his career is the Cubs. Besides he’s 34 and pitched himself off the postseason roster. Teams get burned signing mid 30s pitchers to deals longer than 2 years. He’s not worth more than $8-9 million a year for 2 years.
You are about to get a rude awakening if you think a marginal talent like Hammel won’t get a deal that blows your mind. Mike Pelfrey got a multi-year deal last year and he was never good at any point in his career. This is the MLB Hot Stove season, almost all FA’s who play everyday are going to get massive deals, and Hammel has been good in patches, so he’ll prob get 4/50 or even more.
You’d help yourself if you gave up using phrases like “He’s not worth…” – it doesn’t matter what “his worth” is, what matters is he’s on the market, and he will get a deal that will blow the perceived notion of his “worth” out of the water. It’s just how the market is.
You’re underrating the impact of age. Pelfrey was 31 last year, and Hammel is 34.
Then why wouldn’t it of been a mutual option or a player option?
If there is one hole in the Cubs’ armor, it’s in their rotation depth.
Going into an off season with 5 arms (3 over 30) puts them at a disadvantage trying to trade with any of the other 29 teams. I’m pretty sure that no GM out there is looking to do the Cubs any favors by giving them a mid to back of the rotation starter for a few minor league scraps. The cost of pitching, and even relief pitching is going to be very high.
Putting Montgomery in the rotation has the adverse effect of weakening a relief core that most likely won’t have Chapman as the anchor.
It’s hard to stay on top. Keeping a rotation together and performing at the level they did in 16 will be their first big test.
Solid post. The Cubs got EXTREMELY lucky in regard to their SP last year, as they did not have to use too many “extra guys” to fill in games. I don’t see that happening again and I’m not sure all of their guys will pitch as well. God help the NL if they upgrade their SP.
Its called pitching rotation depth, something most teams don’t have. I wouldn’t be surprised if their rotation is even better in 2017. Also, defense makes pitching better, and the Cubs have the best defensive infield in baseball.
No GM will be taking the approach of doing the Cubs, or any other competitor for that matter, a “favor” when it comes to making trades, least of all an N.L. club. But those same GM’s sure wouldn’t mind having a couple of the Cubs MLB tested pre-arbitration eligible position players either, which they have a surplus of, particularly in the outfield.
Lol the Cubs are not trading Javy or Schwarber… And depending on who’s list you value, the Cubs still have great prospects. Jimenez is an outstanding prospect who will be a top 25 guy next spring. Also have guys like Happ, Candelario, and Dewees that are great 2nd pieces in trades. The Cubs will not deal from their major league roster, minus soler. It’s laughable how much you are pushing the Cubs to trade 30-40 HR potential in Baez, and 35-40 corner outfielder who will field below average, but will rake .280 .360 .500. Lol it’s people like you who thought Baez was not an everyday player. The Cubs won a World Series, why deal from the team that got you there. The importance of a farm system is to replace FreeAgents that leave and to use in trades to upgrade team. They would have a stud Rotation if they made no moves right now. Their bullpen is biggest need. This offseason has abundance of quality BP arms out there. I would be surprised if the Cubs didn’t sign/resign 2-3 BP arms.
I’m a 61-year old die-hard fan of both the Cubs and White Sox. I have a pretty good idea of the value of each team’s players and prospects. I have been an avid supporter of both Javier Baez and Kyle Schwarber since each were #1 Cub draft picks, following their minor league careers on a daily basis as I do each clubs top prospects.
I also realize the value of the White Sox top two pitchers, Chris Sale and Jose Quintana. It’s not terribly likely that the Cubs would part with Schwarber or Baez at this point but if the White Sox do field bids for Sale at least one of those two would have to go back to the South Siders along with another solid piece or two. The White Sox probably won’t budge from any offer they deem necessary to part with Sale but the Cubs just might bend to add the top southpaw in MLB not named Clayton Kershaw…especially if “Condor” was rumored to be going to another N.L. contender like the Dodgers or Nationals.
Say what you will, the Cubs now have question marks regarding their still solid starting rotation. They lack the system depth to fill Hammel’s spot alone in the near term. Going into any season with just 4 starters, regardless how good they are, is asking for trouble. Just ask the Mets. Injuries to the rotation are always a possibility, as I saw first hand with vaunted White Sox staffs in 1984 and 2006 following playoff appearances, as well as the 1985 Cubs. Rotations can crumble in a hurry and relying on Lester, Arrieta (a pending FA next offseason), Hendricks and Lackey (not getting any younger) is a gamble that Theo Epstein won’t allow to happen this offseason. If and when any of these young aces become available the Cubs will be at the front of the line to make sure they have every opportunity to snag one for 2017 and beyond.
Yeah if they wanted to allow Hammel to decide whether he’d be back for 2017 it should have been a mutual option or just a straight up two year deal with no option.
Market is flush with #4
Hammel going to get paid this Winter yes‼️