Hammel Trade Rumors

[CubsWin]

Jason Hammel's name has officially surfaced in a trade rumor. This one to the Yankees.

 

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-05-23/sports/ct-starting-cubs-spt-0524-20140524_1_cubs-starters-travis-wood-rotation

 

A Yankees representative made a special trip to the left-field seats just to watch Cubs starters Jeff Samardzija and Jason Hammel throw bullpen sessions three hours before Friday night's game at Petco Park.

Then there are the obligatory stories in the New York press the day after Hammel bests Tanaka...

 

http://yanksgoyard.com/2014/05/22/jason-hammels-jeff-samardzija-ideal-fits-yankees/

 

http://nypost.com/2014/05/20/trip-to-chicago-gives-yanks-a-look-at-possible-trade-targets/

 

A Hammel trade with the Yankees does make a lot of sense. They have the need with injuries to three of the starters and are currently in 2nd place, 2 games back of Toronto. Hammel is healthy, pitching well and is familiar with and has had success in the AL East. I really have no idea what the Cubs could or should get for him.

 

Because he is a FA signee, Hammel can't be traded until June 15th, that would enable the Cubs to ask for 2013 draftees in return who can't be traded until after June 5th. Ian Clarkin is a 19-year-old LHP who was taken with the 33rd overall pick last season. He's probably too much to ask for, but perhaps a package could be built around the two. If we go off of the Feldman model (a struggling starter and a talented reliever both in their mid-to-late 20s)), 26-year-old LHP Vidal Nuno and 26-year-old, 6'8" reliever Dellin Betances fit the bill. With the Yankees injuries to their rotation, the Yankees may need to keep Nuno, so maybe Betances (who would be a great get by himself in my opinion) and a minor leaguer like Rafael De Paula or Miguel Sulbaran.

 

Again, I really don't know how to value Hammel and what to expect as far as a return. Your thoughts?

[UK1679666180]

Heard directly from someone in Torontos FO that they are more interested in Hammel at this time than Samardzija due to cost.

[pitchcs]

I just can't see them giving up Betances for Hammel.

[Infrequent Poster]

Heard directly from someone in Torontos FO that they are more interested in Hammel at this time than Samardzija due to cost.

Is Daniel Norris and another arm aiming too high?

[UK1679666180]

Heard directly from someone in Torontos FO that they are more interested in Hammel at this time than Samardzija due to cost.

Is Daniel Norris and another arm aiming too high?

 

I don't know, you might get from a team an idea of who they're scouting but not perceived value.

[davell]

No way are the Yanks going to trade Betances. They love him. A one for one of Hammel for Norris would make me very happy.

 

But I kind of suspect the Feldman model. Floundering starter with some upside and an inconsistent reliever or position player.

 

If you could somehow get 2 of Drabek, Gose, Happ, and Nolin-I'd be OK with it.

 

Or one from that group and one of Tirado, Osuna, DeJong, Nay, or Barreto.

[Guest]

It's hard to get a sense in that type of deal what type of package to be happy about, because it takes more trained eyes than I have to identify the 'good' bounceback guys. That said, I've always been interested in Nolin and Gose from Toronto, as well as Romine from NYY.

 

The other thing to keep in mind is that Hammel has been a standard deviation better than Feldman thus far, so the return should reflect that too. I'd still like to see if they can somehow get their hands on an Arrieta-type in the OF for him, but admittedly I'm not sure what that might look like(I don't quite think it's Gose).

[davell]

AA just told Bowden they're looking for SP, a LHRP, and a longterm answer at either 2B or 3B. We fit them EXTREMELY well.

[CubsWin]

AA just told Bowden they're looking for SP, a LHRP, and a longterm answer at either 2B or 3B. We fit them EXTREMELY well.

Hammel, Russell and Olt?

[davell]

AA just told Bowden they're looking for SP, a LHRP, and a longterm answer at either 2B or 3B. We fit them EXTREMELY well.

Hammel, Russell and Olt?

 

Or Valbuena.

[Guest]

AA just told Bowden they're looking for SP, a LHRP, and a longterm answer at either 2B or 3B. We fit them EXTREMELY well.

Hammel, Russell and Olt?

That would have to be a pretty blockbuster package coming back from Toronto.

[CubsWin]

AA just told Bowden they're looking for SP, a LHRP, and a longterm answer at either 2B or 3B. We fit them EXTREMELY well.

Hammel, Russell and Olt?

That would have to be a pretty blockbuster package coming back from Toronto.

Sanchez, Norris and DJ Davis oughta do it! Call the lawyers and draw up the papers!

[Hairyducked Idiot]

AA just told Bowden they're looking for SP, a LHRP, and a longterm answer at either 2B or 3B. We fit them EXTREMELY well.

Hammel, Russell and Olt?

 

I assume they want a *good* LHRP and 2b.

[Guest]

AA just told Bowden they're looking for SP, a LHRP, and a longterm answer at either 2B or 3B. We fit them EXTREMELY well.

Hammel, Russell and Olt?

That would have to be a pretty blockbuster package coming back from Toronto.

Sanchez, Norris and DJ Davis oughta do it! Call the lawyers and draw up the papers!

Sanchez may never throw enough strikes and DJ Davis is really, really raw. Make is Stroman, Norris and Davis and I'm down with it. For a pitcher having a great year, a long term answer at 3B who is near the top of baseball in HR/PA and a capable lefty in the pen it will take a lot in return.

[Guest]

I might be crazy but I'd rather keep Valbuena (2 years control) than Olt.

[bukie]

I might be crazy but I'd rather keep Valbuena (2 years control) than Olt.

I'd rather keep both and trade Barney. He'd totally be a long term answer.

 

 

...to the question "Who is the lightest-hitting infielder in baseball?"

[davell]

I might be crazy but I'd rather keep Valbuena (2 years control) than Olt.

 

I was about to ask which of the 2 has more value. My guess is Olt, but I'm not sure.

[Guest]

I might be crazy but I'd rather keep Valbuena (2 years control) than Olt.

 

I don't really see a reason to trade either this July unless it was part of a many for one deal(e.g. Stanton).

[Guest]

I might be crazy but I'd rather keep Valbuena (2 years control) than Olt.

 

I don't really see a reason to trade either this July unless it was part of a many for one deal(e.g. Stanton).

 

Oh, definitely.

[Guest]

To answer the question though, I agree. Olt has a few years of team control on his side, but at this point there's not a whole lot of reason to think that Olt is at all likely to reach his higher ceiling(he turns 26 in 3 months). Since Valbuena is performing now and has positional flexibility, you keep him if it were a true choice between the two.

[dew1679666265]

To answer the question though, I agree. Olt has a few years of team control on his side, but at this point there's not a whole lot of reason to think that Olt is at all likely to reach his higher ceiling(he turns 26 in 3 months). Since Valbuena is performing now and has positional flexibility, you keep him if it were a true choice between the two.

 

With no apparent plans to make a real run at contending within the next couple of years, though, I'd rather gamble on the upside. If we were right on the edge of making a real push at contention, I'd agree with you that Valbuena's immediate production and flexibility means more.

 

In our situation, though, I think I'd rather take the gamble.

[Guest]

I really don't want to hash out the topic for the millionth time, but I'll leave it at I disagree with your premise.

[dew1679666265]

I really don't want to hash out the topic for the millionth time, but I'll leave it at I disagree with your premise.

 

The premise that a rebuilding team should value upside over production (to a reasonable degree) or the premise that the Cubs don't appear to be planning to invest in contention within the next couple of years? If it's the latter, I'd be glad to throw in some qualifiers so that the comment isn't as definitive (probably should have anyway to keep it from turning into another debate over that).

 

So basically, if the Cubs aren't planning to make a serious run at contention in the next couple of years, I'd prefer Olt's upside. If they have plans to commit to contention within the next couple of years, I'd prefer Valbuena's certainty.

[davell]

If Valbuena were on a 3-4 year deal(would like it if we gave him one personally) he's a no-brainer over Olt. But the controlled years are so far apart between the two, I lean Olt only for that reason.

 

I DO think Olt is the only one of the pair that could help move KB to RF, but it's not looking too promising currently.

 

With only 2B and 3B to fill and Javy, KB, Alcantara and even Villanueva fairly close, I honestly doubt EITHER of Valbuena or Olt are Cubs in 2 years.

[Guest]

I was referring to the latter, but to keep things on the former, the bigger issue there is that of the potential outcomes for Olt, a large amount of the positive ones end up with him as a player of Valbuena's caliber, maybe slightly better or slightly worse. It's difficult to see through the haze because he has a limited amount of PAs above AA, but with his age there's less room for optimism than in other cases. On top of it, even talking about guys with lots of team control, there's a number of players with better chances of reaching "greater than Valbuenadom" coming on the infield(Baez, Bryant, even Alcantara) to make Olt more marginalized.

 

All that said I'm not campaigning to get rid of Olt, there's room for him and Valbuena on a roster or even an infield, but if forced to choose I'll take Valbuena.