August 3, 2026 Trade Deadline Rumors/Gossip/Speculation Thread

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, Jason Ross said:

At this point I don't care one way or the other. They're not getting much of anything back for Rea, so the depth might matter more than the lottery ticket. If they do move him? Fine by me, too.

Yeah id just keep Rea, he can mop up.  Civale/Woodford etc aren't worth keeping over Rea..  Stuff Assad in Iowa to stay stretched,  there's more than a few replacement clunkers in the pen right now that can be tossed. 

They still need some backup SP until Cabrera is back in case of more injuries.  But let's hope Rea never has to make another start in a Cubs uni.

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, Neuby said:

Ayers made Mo expendable . I don't really understand trading Rojas for Holmes but not Soriano?

True, unless they like Holmes better in 2026.

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, Dfan25 said:

I think it was a bad use of resources . Could have been used in a bigger deal later . I am happy they were active , but I think this trade was a bit much .

This is why you get as many pieces as you think you'll need in the offseason.

[JBears79]

Both Holmes and Guasman could be extension candidates, no?

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, Jason Ross said:

I don't think they made the trade based on 16 IP.

But I do think today the Cubs told you Mo isn't a catcher. And if he's a DH, he's a DH who doesn't hit LHP well. The line on Mo was always "is he a catcher or a DH?" Behind the plate he's a great young player. As a DH it's a hard one to find a ton of value. So I think the value here matches.

I think Mo will catch at least part-time, but we all know he's almost certainly below-average defensively and so do the Cubs and Angels.

I also am not convinced this deadline necessarily says anything about Ayers.  It could be very well that the Angels liked Mo better than Ayers.  We shouldn't assume things, we don't know how any teams value anyone, which is the issue with us fans evaluating any of these TDL moves.

[Stratos]

2 hours ago, Outshined_One said:

I know LA's rotation is killer, but that pen is beatable and their offense is currently sporting a Kyle Tucker-sized hole.

If their pen is beatable then what does that make ours?  Diaz is back before this Cubs series

Edited 10 hours ago by Stratos

[Jason Ross]

9 minutes ago, Stratos said:

I think Mo will catch at least part-time, but we all know he's almost certainly below-average defensively and so do the Cubs and Angels.

I also am not convinced this deadline necessarily says anything about Ayers.  It could be very well that the Angels liked Mo better than Ayers.  We shouldn't assume things, we don't know how any teams value anyone, which is the issue with us fans evaluating any of these TDL moves.

I'm going to try to put this in a way that doesn't make me sound like I'm bragging or trying to flex, but I've had a few conversations over the last few days with people who's names people would recognize who have relayed this on Ayers. I'm not assuming. It's not anyone with the team direct, but it's people I trust very much so.

This organization is high on him. Higher than FG is is. They are also higher on Ayers than Rojas, as an example from everything I have gathered. I had Rojas as my #1 prospect two days ago. With what I've heard on how the team views him, I wouldn't have him there any more. 

If I were to add Rojas into my rankings, my best guess on a Cubs internal is that Hartshorn is #1, with Ayers as the internal second best prospect in the system. I am not entirel sure Rojas would be third, either. 

[We Got The Whole 9]

8 minutes ago, JBears79 said:

Both Holmes and Guasman could be extension candidates, no?

Surely. In particular I think Jed may have had an inkling that that is possible with Holmes and that made him more inclined to move Rojas like that. 

[squally1313]

3 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

I'm going to try to put this in a way that doesn't make me sound like I'm bragging or trying to flex, but I've had a few conversations over the last few days with people who's names people would recognize who have relayed this on Ayers. I'm not assuming. It's not anyone with the team direct, but it's people I trust very much so.

This organization is high on him. Higher than FG is is. They are also higher on Ayers than Rojas, as an example from everything I have gathered. I had Rojas as my #1 prospect two days ago. With what I've heard on how the team views him, I wouldn't have him there any more. 

Which is all well and good, but you could have said the same thing about Ballesteros last year. They don’t necessarily get the benefit of the doubt just because they put his name higher on their board than the ones we can read. They have to actually be right. 

[Jason Ross]

2 minutes ago, squally1313 said:

Which is all well and good, but you could have said the same thing about Ballesteros last year. They don’t necessarily get the benefit of the doubt just because they put his name higher on their board than the ones we can read. They have to actually be right. 

To be fair to the Cubs, they haven't been wrong on this front very often under Hoyer. They won't bat 1.000, and I'll let the article I'm working on (with more information!) do more of the talking, but based on what I heard...I get where they're coming from. 

At least on Rojas. I've got more information there.

Now I know, maybe they could have been "more right" last summer or whatever, but things change, and especially with young players, it takes time on that front. But they've nailed most of their evals when push comes to shove. Benefit of the doubt probably is fair here.

[PeanutPunch33]

Ballesteros has to lose some weight if he wants to become an everyday big leaguer.  Maybe the temptations of Portillos or Lou's was too much for him 😂

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, Jason Ross said:

I think the medicals could be an issue. 

I've been thinking about it logically, but pulling out of a trade because of Owen Ayers doesn't make sense. It wasn't like that name was new. I heard that name yesterday morning from some people who would know (not Matt) and more today. Matt wrote about it yesterday morning. Matt wrote about it today. Jed doesn't come off as the guy who last second gets emotional about a player and then straight up pulls out. 

So what would cause a last-second pull out?

There's no way the Cubs ditch on Detmers because of Ayers IMO.

I'd rather go Detmers for Ayers+ than Holmes for Rojas.

Reality is the Cubs weren't going to trade Ayers+Mo today.  Id like to know how the Cubs feel about Ayers' glove.  A 70 arm from Cubs.com is very impressive to start.

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, Tangled Up in Plaid said:

Tater Workman? lol

Whiffer Workman?

[We Got The Whole 9]

1 minute ago, PeanutPunch33 said:

Ballesteros has to lose some weight if he wants to become an everyday big leaguer.  Maybe the temptations of Portillos or Lou's was too much for him 😂

Ironically I think his biggest issue is not pulling enough balls, especially in the air. Too much of a tendency to shoot oppo without much hard contact. 

[Stratos]

Braxton Garrett is 2027 Boyd.

[We Got The Whole 9]

3 minutes ago, Stratos said:

There's no way the Cubs ditch on Detmers because of Ayers IMO.

I'd rather go Detmers for Ayers+ than Holmes for Rojas.

Reality is the Cubs weren't going to trade Ayers+Mo today.  Id like to know how the Cubs feel about Ayers' glove.  A 70 arm from Cubs.com is very impressive to start.

I've heard he has very good pop times as well

[KCCub]

If I heard Jed correctly just now on Marquee, mentioned controllable starters and having a lot of discussions - “didn’t get close on one”. TIFWIW

[Stratos]

1 hour ago, Tangled Up in Plaid said:

Luke Little was DFA'd to make room on the roster

Good luck to that gangly behemoth.

[KCCub]

4 minutes ago, KCCub said:

If I heard Jed correctly just now on Marquee, mentioned controllable starters and having a lot of discussions - “didn’t get close on one”. TIFWIW

 

[Stratos]

26 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

I'm going to try to put this in a way that doesn't make me sound like I'm bragging or trying to flex, but I've had a few conversations over the last few days with people who's names people would recognize who have relayed this on Ayers. I'm not assuming. It's not anyone with the team direct, but it's people I trust very much so.

This organization is high on him. Higher than FG is is. They are also higher on Ayers than Rojas, as an example from everything I have gathered. I had Rojas as my #1 prospect two days ago. With what I've heard on how the team views him, I wouldn't have him there any more. 

If I were to add Rojas into my rankings, my best guess on a Cubs internal is that Hartshorn is #1, with Ayers as the internal second best prospect in the system. I am not entirel sure Rojas would be third, either. 

Fair enough!  Does that mean the Cubs like Ayers better than Mo?  Where would Mo fit if still on the top prospect list?

[Jason Ross]

Just now, Stratos said:

Fair enough!  Does that mean the Cubs like Ayers better than Mo?  Where would Mo fit if still on the top prospect list?

I didn't get a direct 1:1 on Mo or Ayers. But I can tell you this: the Cubs weren't going to trade Owen Ayers today and not also get another young C from somewhere else. So this is an assumption but one I think is an easy one to make: if the Cubs were that high on Mo right now, they probably don't require another young C to deal Ayers, because they would have already had one. 

I'm convinced that both the Cubs adore Owen Ayers and that the Cubs had soured on Ballesteros defensively.

[Stratos]

25 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

Surely. In particular I think Jed may have had an inkling that that is possible with Holmes and that made him more inclined to move Rojas like that. 

I personally don't think the sign+extend thing is much of a calculation with Jed deals.  There's no guarantees with them so the value is minimal. 

Both pitchers will also be 34/36 next year, not exactly ages Jed should like.  If any has a chance to extend it would be Holmes because of the groundballs and younger age, but for me I'm assuming he's gone after this year.

[Stratos]

28 minutes ago, Jason Ross said:

To be fair to the Cubs, they haven't been wrong on this front very often under Hoyer. They won't bat 1.000, and I'll let the article I'm working on (with more information!) do more of the talking, but based on what I heard...I get where they're coming from. 

At least on Rojas. I've got more information there.

Now I know, maybe they could have been "more right" last summer or whatever, but things change, and especially with young players, it takes time on that front. But they've nailed most of their evals when push comes to shove. Benefit of the doubt probably is fair here.

I'll say that the Cubs know 100x more about their own prospects than we do.  I trust their evaluations.

[BKHoo]

It feels like the Brewers made the perfect moves to defeat the Cubs, not the Dodgers.  We will see. 

[Derwood]

53 minutes ago, JBears79 said:

Both Holmes and Guasman could be extension candidates, no?

Gausman will be 36 next year, so maybe a 1-year