Why The Matt Garza Trade Is A Good Deal For The Cubs
by Al Yellon on Jan 7, 2011 12:40 PM CST
in Chicago Cubs News
Email
PrintFirst of all, we needed an overflow thread for all the comments, so I figured I'd post one and also explain a little bit about why I'm OK with this trade after having stated that I didn't want to give up Chris Archer in any deal for Matt Garza.
It is true that Chris Archer dominated in the minor leagues last year -- at both levels where he pitched. He was named Cubs Minor League Pitcher of the Year and had a shot at being in the rotation this season.
A shot, but no guarantee. Had this trade not been made, Archer would have been in competition with Carlos Silva, Andrew Cashner, Jeff Samardzija, Casey Coleman and Tom Gorzelanny for the last spot in the rotation. All of those have major league experience. Yes, I know -- all of them are flawed. And Archer may turn out to be better than any of them.
But now the Cubs have an actual starter with major league experience, and someone who's never been injured, and has playoff and World Series experience. Thus, maybe someone like Gorzelanny or Coleman can be traded. The Cubs gave up a possible years-long future star for someone who's under team control for three years at a fairly reasonable cost. It's not as if they traded Archer for a 30-year-old starting pitcher who can be a free agent at the end of this year.
Archer may spend the year in Triple-A -- he's not likely to crack the Rays' rotation.
Let's look at this in comparison to other Cubs young players and prospects dealt away in the past. Many people were in love with Rich Hill and Felix Pie -- and wouldn't have traded those guys in 2007 or 2008 for anything. Turns out, that would have been the best thing to do, as neither has become anything close to a major league star. Jim Hendry held on to those guys too long.
About the other people involved in the deal, Hak-Ju Lee has "star potential" written all over him. But he may be two or three years away from the major leagues and we simply do not know where he'll end up. Many Cubs prospects who have starred at the level that Lee has, have flamed out.
The deal for Juan Pierre in 2005 has been mentioned. That was a bad trade: the perceived value of Ricky Nolasco, Renyel Pinto and Sergio Mitre was much higher than "Juan Pierre" in December 2005. And that should tell you something about this deal, too. Nolasco has become a good, but not great, major league starter. Pinto was viewed as a top prospect -- he's been a mediocre middle reliever. Mitre has been bad. The point is, we just do not know how prospects are going to pan out.
As for Brandon Guyer and Robinson Chirinos -- they're older and project as major league backups, if that. Respected analysts such as Jim Callis, Kevin Goldsetin and John Sickels have said the Cubs made out pretty well in this deal, giving up good but not great prospects to get a solid major league starter. There are two other minor leaguers coming back to the Cubs; one of them is Fernando Perez, who could make the Cubs as a backup outfielder. He takes the spot of Sam Fuld, who may get a better chance to take a roster spot in Tampa than he had in Chicago.
Am I thrilled with this deal? No, it's not a world-beater. But neither is it something that you should bring out the torches and pitchforks for Jim Hendry, and I certainly don't hate it, as many do. Many people here have bitched and complained when Hendry held on to prospects (Hill and Pie, for example) for too long and ruined any trade value they had. Now he's rolled the dice on a deal with guys who were highly-rated... but has left the Cubs system with guys like Brett Jackson, Trey McNutt and Cashner. The system has finally gotten deep and produced. That's one reason you produce minor leaguers -- to acquire good major leaguers in trade.
Matt Garza, Carlos Zambrano and Ryan Dempster make a very solid top three starters for the 2011 Cubs. Get good years out of #4 and #5 and improved bullpen performance, and the team has a shot at real improvement in 2011.
908 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
oh please.
In a era where prospects are a big deal the Cubs got the shaft.
"I don't know what the big deal about Crackerjack is"
by theGraceyslumpbuster on Jan 7, 2011 12:42 PM CST via mobile reply actions 2 recs
"Prospects are a big deal".
So what are you going to do with them? Just stockpile them so we can say we have them?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
How about
get maximum value for them.
by SenorYuletide on Jan 7, 2011 12:45 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe that WAS their maximum value.
Cubs fans are well known for overvaluing prospects.
Correct.
That’s how I see this. I could be wrong, but I see this as value for value.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Lawrie for Marcum
versus Lee and Archer for Garza.
I still think Hendry overpaid in an attempt to save his job.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
by rlpete on Jan 7, 2011 12:49 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
I agree.
"I don't know what the big deal about Crackerjack is"
by theGraceyslumpbuster on Jan 7, 2011 12:50 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Garza is a better, younger, more consistent pitcher who I believe is under control for longer
Lawrie is a better prospect than anything we traded. Not sure how I understand how you came to that conclusion.
Hot Time In Old Town SB Nation's blog for Chicago Fire, Soccer, & Chicago History
by Tweed Thornton on Jan 7, 2011 12:53 PM CST up reply actions
Let's start simply....
Marcum 2010 ERA+ : 114
Garza 2010 ERA+: 101
Marcum 2010 WHIP: 1.14
Garza 2010 WHIP: 1.25
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
by rlpete on Jan 7, 2011 1:31 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
You are right though
Garza is controlled for one year.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
by rlpete on Jan 7, 2011 1:32 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Sure but 2009, 2008, 2007
Marcum – N/A
Marcum – 151 IPs
Marcum – 159 IPs
and Marcum is older. There are serious durability issues.
Hot Time In Old Town SB Nation's blog for Chicago Fire, Soccer, & Chicago History
by Tweed Thornton on Jan 7, 2011 1:36 PM CST up reply actions
Wasn't Lawrie
The Brewers’ top prospect?
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 12:54 PM CST up reply actions
Probably a higher reasonable WAR expectaton
than Lee or Archer, though that’s a guess.
Brett Lawrie
was Milwaukee’s #1 prospect and he is light years better than anyone that the Cubs gave up in theat deal
"Go Cubs!"
Sickels for one disagrees
Lawrie: B+
Archer: B+
Lee: B
If Lawrie cannot stay at 2nd his value goes down.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
by rlpete on Jan 7, 2011 1:27 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Other Lawrie rankings, for what it's worth
Ranking in ScoutingBook (1/7/2011): #18
Ranking in Baseball America 2011: #59
Ranking in Baseball Prospectus: #99
Ranking in MiLB.com 2011 Season Preview: #26
Ranking from the Sporting News: Unranked
Ranking from ESPN: #47
"Go Cubs!"
No one denies that Lawrie isn't a prospect
but people then seem to imply that the Cubs prospects aren’t worth anything. If Lawries ends up in the outfield, he is far from an elite prospect. I really think Lawrie and Archer are similar prospects and if the deal was just Archer I would be ok with it. Throwing in Lee is overpaying.
Just like the way Hendry throws around money like candy, he threw too much here to the Rays.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
The experts don't agree with you
but the bottom line is, we’ll see what happens down the road. Hopefully it’s a win\win at worst.
"Go Cubs!"
So where does Archer rate on those lists
since you have them all so handy? I didn’t know that BA released theirs for 2011 yet.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
Archer was our #1 prospect
on BA’s list
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 2:19 PM CST up reply actions
And the Brewers trade him
for Marcum?
Now, IMHO, that is a dumb deal.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 1:34 PM CST up reply actions
And other than the fact that the Brewers are likely to be contenders?
Oh, wait. That’s a reason why the Brewers trade would be better than the Cubs trade. Never mind then.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 1:56 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
It's not as dumb as
signing Gagne for $8 million-something, like Melvin once did. But for Marcum … seems like too much.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 2:03 PM CST up reply actions
I see this as value for value
That’s not what you said before when you agree Archer shouldn’t be included in a Garza deal.
You’re simply spinning the deal at this point, Al, even if you sincerely believe what you’re typing.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
by fsuapollo on Jan 7, 2011 1:37 PM CST up reply actions 6 recs
I think that's the key to this.
These prospects look very good. But they might not be. We just don’t know.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
True.
In a perfect world, out of any team’s top 10 minor league players, maybe 5 become regulars…..and that’s generous.
Come on Lisa, I'm trying to impress people here. You don't win friends with salad. ~ Homer J. Simpson
by TheBeerBaron on Jan 7, 2011 12:55 PM CST up reply actions
50% is very generous.
If I had to put a number on the league average, I’d say closer to 20%. As a Cub fan, judging by our history with minor league prospects, at times I would have been thrilled with a 20% success rate.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
That's where
we’re disagreeing. I for one think we gave too much at a time when it didn’t make sense to do so.
by SenorYuletide on Jan 7, 2011 12:49 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
In that case, stand pat.
The acquisition of infinite #2-#3 arms is not going to create a top rotation. It’s going to create a mediocre rotation.
Better to roll the dice on a prospect with promise, than to settle for a guy who has established himself as an above-average middle rotation guy.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 12:49 PM CST up reply actions 10 recs
True enough
But the Cubs still have McNutt and Cashner…..hopefully at least one of them is worth their respective hype and become a #2-3.
If the Cubs find a true TOR, their starting pitching depth at #5 would be better than most team’s #3’s.
Come on Lisa, I'm trying to impress people here. You don't win friends with salad. ~ Homer J. Simpson
by TheBeerBaron on Jan 7, 2011 12:57 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
There's always next year.
Wait. That means… GASP. We’re shooting to contend in 2012… and we’re putting in pieces RIGHT NOW?
Five foot three seems to thrive on his misery...
And this is why the Rays farm system works...
Proud recipient of a hot dog shot from the Iowa Cubs hot dog gun.
although
in their 12 year history they have only contended for 3 years and now most of those teams are gone, they arent going to contend at all this year…since 1998 the cubs have been in the playoffs 4 times, contended another 2 years and project to contend next year…it will be tough but this should be a +.500 team with a different, more engaged manager, a MUCH improved bullpen, a decent LH bat, Ramirez in a contract year, Soto hopefully healthy, Soriano should improve and at least as good of a rotation as they had last year…the Cubs need to have a 2008 style season but contention, I believe, is within our grasp
to be fair
you’re saying they wont contend this year and it has little to do with the quality of their team and everything to do with the quality of their division. The years prior this wasn’t the case, but going forward if they dont compete a large part of it is due to their division
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 4:31 PM CST up reply actions
I didnt say they wont contend this year because of their division
I said, albeit poorly, that they wont contend because they dont have enough good players – they trade them away Marlins style…they do have a good minor league system but this year that is all they will have even if they were in the NL central
i bet they win 81+ games
which over in the NL would be a near-contender, when you consider schedule strength difference
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 6:53 PM CST up reply actions
yep
by some of these posts, you’d think we just gave up 4 all-stars, it’s unbelievable. and funny.
"It's important in life to not give a shit. It can help you a lot." - George Carlin
So getting the cheapest pitcher that they can that is a B at best
is better?
They gave up TOO much. Stockpile them, Al? Too bad we didn’t trade Colvin, right? He wasn’t worth waiting for because these days instant gratification is king.
"I don't know what the big deal about Crackerjack is"
by theGraceyslumpbuster on Jan 7, 2011 12:48 PM CST up reply actions
Sorry Al,
but there is no defending this deal. I understand you have to give up some prospects to get a guy like Garza, but Archer fuld and Chirinos should have done it. The second Lee is added to that list you pull the deal off the table. Its basically feels like Hendry said "well you cant have brett Jackson and both Archer and McNutt but hey help yourself to anything else you want!
Prospects got us Rick Sutcliffe in 1984
The Cubs would not have won the NL East without Sutcliffe. Yes, Joe Carter went on to a great career and I think he should be in the HOF, but Sutcliffe was the final piece of the puzzle for that ballclub. Interesting note: the Cubs almost got Blyleven in that trade. He really wanted to come to Chicago, but the Cubs preferred Sutcliffe.
by jeffmills1972 on Jan 8, 2011 10:42 AM CST up reply actions
"...the Cubs almost got Blyleven"
When I was shooting pregame stuff for FSN, sometimes I’d have a chance to just yakk with Bert during downtime while the producer was rounding up another suspect or two.
Bert liked Wrigley – a lot. And I think he’d have made a good (and interesting) Cub.
Not that I minded having Rick Sutcliffe take the mound that year in any way, of course!
suckling at the power teet
eh?
"I don't know what the big deal about Crackerjack is"
by theGraceyslumpbuster on Jan 7, 2011 12:53 PM CST up reply actions
Because their current big signings are faltering
or have you not watched the past two seasons? What was Colvin and Castro? Prospects, that’s right.
"I don't know what the big deal about Crackerjack is"
by theGraceyslumpbuster on Jan 7, 2011 3:53 PM CST up reply actions
an*
"I don't know what the big deal about Crackerjack is"
by theGraceyslumpbuster on Jan 7, 2011 12:57 PM CST up reply actions
Prospects are just that, prospects
and the Cubs are famous for holding on to theirs far too long.
If the Cubs are going to compete in ’12 and ’13, they had better start making improvements now. This deal is one of them.
Is it huge? No, however it looks like the rotation is starting to shape up a bit and it now gives Hendry the flexibility to deal a current guy that may have been slated for the rotation in say part of a deal in an effort to unload Domer and/or acquire better middle-relievers.
Just win the next game...!
by blackhawk24 on Jan 7, 2011 1:00 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
The Oakland A's, Minnesota Twins, and Colorado Rockies
Have done it. Improvements now? They signed a first baseman to a one year deal as well as a setup man and you expect this team without a 3rd baseman soon enough, a first baseman, a shoddy left fielder, and Tyler Colvin, which some people are on the fence about to be contenders in ’12 or ’13 because of getting a 2 or 3 slot in the rotation guy? No way.
I don’t care if the Cubs are known for this and for that. This is a different ownership, hopefully things have changed. Selling the farm for a guy that is 2 or 3 at best is dumb and where does this leave us? Back at a team without a TRUE ace. Pony up the prospects if you’re going to make this kind of trade and push for Greinke.
"I don't know what the big deal about Crackerjack is"
by theGraceyslumpbuster on Jan 7, 2011 3:51 PM CST up reply actions
They gotta start somewhere and the rotation is the best place to start
The fact you don’t care about the Cubs holding on to prospects too long tells me you don’t understand one use of the farm system. Teams cannot just stockpile youngsters. The farm is sometimes used to get established players.
The only way to tell if the Cubs overpaid is if Garza doesn’t pan out well and the prospects get up to MLB and do very well. And that won’t be happening anytime soon.
No one sold the farm & the Cubs farm is as good now as anytime in the last 10-15 years. LF & 3B are NOT on the table now. Near 100% chance neither can be moved early this season, and only then, if Rami is healthy & the Cubs are out of it nearing the NWT deadline.
Greinke gets the Cubs barely further than they are now. What this trade does is open the possiblility for more moves. Too many people view trades in a vacuum which makes it impossible for them to view a move impartially.
Just win the next game...!
Moving this over from the other thread
I’ll be rooting for Garza, and as happy as anyone if he lights up the NL Central. But for now, count me in the ranks of the disappointed. What I can’t get out of my mind is that we in no way NEEDED to do this deal. There was simply no good reason for us to trade promising young prospects for a mid-level starter. Even if Garza turns into a fantastic starter, he alone won’t get us to the world series in the next 3 years. This just pushes the prospect train back a few years, and will make us more dependent on FA to fill in the gaps to contend.
And we still don’t have a sure-fire top of the rotation impact starter in the rotation, nor an impact corner power bat in the whole system. If we were going to deal from a position of depth (SS and SP), we should have gotten something we needed as a system, a corner bats or a high end starter (depending on who the unnamed pitcher is).
I’ll be the first to admit I was in love with HJ Lee, so I may be a little blinded by his loss. I was also a big Guyer backer, but I’m probably the least worried about losing him (Fuld notwithstanding). I can see dealing Archer with Cashner and McNutt also around, but I have the sinking feeling that Archer has as much or more upside as Garza, and would have been around for more years in which we would have a better chance to compete.
Finally, to top it off, I give you Jonah Keri at Bloomberg Sport’s analysis of Matt Garza with the Cubs
Remember, Garza is 27, not 30.
So he could also be around for quite a few years.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
True, he could be extended,
but it remains to be seen if he will be more valuable on an extension than Archer during his pre-arb and arbitration years.
Again, I’ll be happy if everything works out and Garza takes his game to the next level. But for now I’m bummed and a little less optimistic about the Cubs’ future.
He doesn't need to be extended...
… for another two years.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
And Archer wouldn't need to be extended for 6
at the earliest if he came up this year. What I’m saying is that if Archer becomes anywhere close to the pitcher Garza is, he will be way more valuable based on salary relative to production.
by Bradsbeard on Jan 7, 2011 2:46 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
I won't belabor the point,
but you have something of a history of being against an idea regarding the Cubs, and then getting rather wholeheartedly behind it after it comes to pass. So, I’m not entirely sure what to think about this post, Al.
Personally, I think Hendry blinked on this trade, but I can’t really say more about it than that. It’s not a terrible deal. But I have to say, this is really an topic that I would expect to garner great debate, as it’s a trade that really forces you to stop and ask what the plan is on Addison.
by Damen Jackson on Jan 7, 2011 12:48 PM CST reply actions 3 recs
The Cubs got the raw end of this deal
This is a trade I’d feel more comfortable with if they just needed another piece to get back in contention. The problem is that the Cubs are years away from being true contenders while we wait for the backloaded deals to come off the books. Look forward to the dark ages, folks.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
by Ace Venom on Jan 7, 2011 12:48 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Exactly.
Does Garza mean we can contend with the Cards, Brewers, and Reds? Not at all.
"I don't know what the big deal about Crackerjack is"
by theGraceyslumpbuster on Jan 7, 2011 12:51 PM CST up reply actions
Nah
It’s about right. They’re all better than the Cubs.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
by Ace Venom on Jan 7, 2011 12:54 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Garza will help the Cubs at least keep pace with these 3
I like this trade – we needed an impact trade heading into Spring. And now Zambrano will not be the only guy in the rotation with a hot temper.
Sweeter words have rarely been spoken: "...and the cardinals are down to their final out."
by scottsdalecubs on Jan 7, 2011 12:58 PM CST up reply actions
You're right a team that picked up a cy young award winner
A solid starter that also pitched against the AL East and got less in return for that pitcher, have a productive line up is overrated? Not in my opinion.
"I don't know what the big deal about Crackerjack is"
by theGraceyslumpbuster on Jan 7, 2011 12:54 PM CST up reply actions
Could you elaborate?
All of those teams sport a pair of legitimate aces, a more productive middle of the lineup, and comparable bullpens to the Cubs. Just for the sake of conversation, how do you arrive at that opinion?
by Damen Jackson on Jan 7, 2011 12:55 PM CST up reply actions
And by disagreeing...
we all you think you’re overrating the Cubs. Funny how that works. Come up with another source that says the Cubs are better than a fourth-place team next year… and that’s with Garza.
Now that they’ve made this deal and given up two of their top prospects, they have to be at least a third-place team in a way that sets up for future contention, or this trade and season will become a huge failure. Hold on to Archer and Lee and the Cubs still would have a solid rotation for this season and could make the decision with what to do with their available assets either during this season or after it’s over.
That’s what a team and a GM looking to rebuild the right way would have done… rather than do… this.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 12:59 PM CST up reply actions 12 recs
2011 isn't 2012.
Not everything that’s available now would be available next year for the same price.
Pick your battles, this isn’t one to fight on. It was a good trade, decent timing, cost controlled upper mid rotation pitching with significant upside. Especially if we’re getting pieces back that make sense..
What if Archer and Lee both bust? Did we win the deal? This is the game that all FO’s play. Play lets make a deal, you know what’s behind door number 1, now you guess if it’s possible that doors 2 & 3 hold more value than what you’re currently holding.
I’d say that, right now… It’s probably a push. I don’t think either side really got more out of it than the other, especially pending what the Cubs get back.
Five foot three seems to thrive on his misery...
And that's what it should be most of the time.
You trade your pieces that don’t fit (i.e. a backup catcher logjammed as it is), and turn a high upside prospect into… a mlb starting pitcher.
I don’t get how this is SO BAD. We could Yammer about the value of Garza for days (or weeks as it has been), but, the fact is we turned a mystery box into a known quantity. That’s how you play the game.
Five foot three seems to thrive on his misery...
It's worse...
because the Cubs already had 6 starting pitchers… most of which are equal or better than Garza. They didn’t need to give up what they gave up for such a marginal increase in potential.
What Hendry did is turn a mystery box and a known quantity into a known quantity that is both more expensive and no guarantee to be better than what they already had.
Next year, I’d be in favor of taking this risk… this year, I’m not. Next year, I’m doing cartwheels. This year, I’m yawning. I’m not up in arms over this deal… but I don’t like an organization I want to win in the future showing these trends and not learning from past mistakes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:24 PM CST up reply actions
Equal or better?
No way in hell are the starting pitchers we already have better or equal to Garza. None. I’m just sayin…
"Go Cubs!"
"6 Starting Pitchers Equal or Better than Garza."
Explain.
I disagree with your opinion tremendously.
This I think is the root of the problem.
Five foot three seems to thrive on his misery...
You have to put Z, Dempster and Wells on his level. Last year, Lilly was too.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:33 PM CST up reply actions
So was
Gorzelanny as far as WAR goes… and that’s giving Garza credit for his Tropicana Field-aided numbers.
I’m not saying he’s not an improvement to the team… just that he’s not enough of an improvement to the team this year that you’d blow out prospects in a rebuilding year.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:39 PM CST up reply actions
For further evidence...
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-matt-garza-deal-from-the-cubs-perspective/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:40 PM CST up reply actions
Wells!
WAR
-————
Wells, 2009 3.3
Wells, 2010 3.3
Garza, 2009 3.2
Garza, 2010 1.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 2:25 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
How dare you...
put something in quotes and attribute it to me and leave very important parts out. Try again.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:34 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
You changed tenses a bunch.
Yes we HAD 6 starting pitchers that may have been as good as Garza…
We don’t HAVE 6 starting pitchers on our roster that ARE as good as Garza.
Five foot three seems to thrive on his misery...
Read it again.
It’s not what I said at all… I demand a retraction.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:42 PM CST up reply actions
If you have this much problem misquoting people...
I suggest you use cut and paste… it’s free.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:42 PM CST up reply actions
Sorry. Don't really like your tone.
You said:
It’s worse…
because the Cubs already had 6 starting pitchers… most of which are equal or better than Garza.
The cubs HAD six starting pitchers that most (i’d say 4 tops, and we’re not talking Y2Y), are equal or better than Garza.
This is the assumption that we currently have 4 starting pitchers that ARE better or equal to Garza, which, I think is false. Which is what I assume your premise was. If i’m wrong, please correct me instead of insulting my understanding of your concept.
If you don’t understand my rebuttal, please ask me to clarify instead of demeaning me. Thanks.
Five foot three seems to thrive on his misery...
I think the key word you left out of his quote was "most".
New strategy for 2011:
"Let's wait for 2 or 3 more years to see if our prospects pan out".
'most' is still rather nebulous.
Most could mean 6, it could mean 4, 3… Whatever.
Either way, I’d say that ‘most’ is about as accurate as ‘equal or better’.
Five foot three seems to thrive on his misery...
How the hell...
could most mean all of them?
It either means 3 or 4 or 5 depending on how you view Tom Gorzelanny and Carlos Silva. The numbers from last year said you put them together and they made a pitcher superior to Matt Garza, whose only superior attribute was his ability to eat innings.
Dempster, Zambrano, Wells and Gorzelanny/Silva all had numbers better than or equal to what Matt Garza put up last year. When you add Andrew Cashner and Chris Archer into the mix and factor in the fact the Cubs aren’t going to compete even with Garza pitching better than he ever has before, you get no reason to add another starting pitcher.
Hopefully Garza moves into the 3 WAR starter level… or even higher… because even then he’s only adding 1 win more than the Cubs got last year.
And then when he does that (leading the Cubs all the way to a magical third-place finish), he’ll become ridiculously expensive on a team that’s trying to cut payroll while it should be adding more to keep up with teams like the Phillies.
Basically… there’s no point to calling this a good trade now. It’s a meh trade that only the future can make better. Given that future will probably have to happen with a new GM, I’d rather a new GM got to deal these prospects for a player he wanted whether it was Garza or someone else.
The reality is still this will be a wasted year of having Garza. There are always pitchers available. Look who has been traded over the last three years… some of them multiple times for far less than Archer and Lee.
The Cubs would have been able to pick up a “Garza” next season or at midseason this year when we knew better about their chances for contention in the future.
Instead, the Cubs chose the worse of those options to make an improvement in their rotation, now and for the future.
When the Cubs made a similar deal for Harden/Gaudin, that was the cherry on top. The Cubs are more than a few sprinkles short of a sundae at this point.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 2:20 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't care if you don't really like my tone
I don’t like being misquoted. Plain and simple.
Your rebuttal meant nothing to me because you did so. Your ability to understand what I’m saying means far less to me than your requirement to not put words in my mouth.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:53 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Fair enough.
It wasn’t intentional, as I felt I was grasping what you were implying.
Five foot three seems to thrive on his misery...
But what if...
Colvin and Castro continue to develop…
Pena and Wood turn out to be great signings…
Z throws the way he did in the second half for the whole season…
Aramis regains his stroke…
I tend to agree with the Cubs “losing” this deal in the long haul, but 2011-2012 could end up being above expectations. Who knows? Maybe Hendry’s not done tweaking the lineup.
Proud recipient of a hot dog shot from the Iowa Cubs hot dog gun.
so you're saying.....
“What if EVERYTHING goes right?”
"Oh Crap"
-Famous Last Words by General George Custer
What if everything goes right? (Wandering a bit...)
First, to disabuse the ledge-jumpers here, whose reaction seems to be “OMG – we’re all going to die because of this trade – PANIC NOW!” (and indeed, we are all going to die, the relevant questions are only when and how) I’d suggest that we are still going to have to play the 2011 season out. The real impact of this trade will not be known until well into this season – possibly longer.
And a question: Isn’t the result of “everything going right” usually a championship? Or at least the fewest things going wrong? (I’m not betting on it, just asking.)
This is not a one-year deal. Garza will be aboard for a few years, and if he’s a good addition for two to four (or more, depending on multiple things) years or so, why is that a bad thing? We’re not going to win championships tomorrow or even next week, and all of next season may be at best described afterward as “been in contention” – still, let’s just take a few breaths and see what happens once actual games begin, can we at least do that?
Archer has yet to pitch in the majors for a season, and until he does, he’s a “might be”.
This trade is a few “might bes” for one “is” and some “maybe” – that’s how I see it anyway.
Good thing we decide championships
by predictions by sources.
by californiachicagoan on Jan 7, 2011 2:19 PM CST up reply actions
i think you're overrating the cubs
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 1:14 PM CST up reply actions
Could Be A 4-Team Race
I wouldn’t be surprised if we had one of the closest 4-team races ever among the Cards, Brewers, Reds, and Cubs. They could all win between 82 and 88 games in 2011, but I don’t see any of them being too good.
2011 - The 103rd time is the charm.
Part of the memory of 2010
is the empty seats. With empty seats, revenue suffers. I’m just sayin’.
Adding Matt Garza is not going to help fill the seats
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 12:56 PM CST up reply actions
Nope
Filling the seats could be accomplished further down the road by showing some patience. If you have the tools in place, then you can go out and spend, trade or whatever. It works for other big market teams.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
Given the debt burden the Ricketts are facing ...
I wonder if filling seats “down the road” is acceptable.
Contention puts fans in seats
That’s tried and true.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
Agreed -- totally.
But you’re saying the Ricketts would have to punt on contention this year for filling the seats down the road. And I don’t think they’re willing or able to do that.
I don't think "We Got Matt Garza!" is going to be effective in selling single-game tix.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:06 PM CST up reply actions
No, it won't
Being over .500 will. Punting the season in February in a recession is a good way to limit ticket sales.
And I’m an Archer/HJ Lee fan.
They could've tried to get a second baseman then
GM's are in charge of Managers, not the other way around.
So NOT trading your top pitching prospect
(and others) for a solid mid-rotation pitcher = punting? That doesn’t compute.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
Putting out a 77 win team
in a recession is punting, imo.
Then what is putting out a 79 win team?
Since, really in a best case scenario Garza improves the team by 2 wins.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
I don't like the trade
until I know the final player. Doing nothing makes us closer to Houston than third place. Quality minor leaguers had to be dealt to avoid empty seats.
Does everything equate? No. But this is what we could get for what we were willing to give up.
So Garza is a seat filler?
More so than Silva/Coleman, for sure… but resigning Kerry Wood for $1.5M will sell far more tickets than acquiring Garza.
The fact that they “tried” to get better in the winter won’t mean jack when this team is 10 under in July.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
Probably correct.
If you can’t pitch or hit well, getting fannies in the seats will be tough. At least we will have a good SP more often now in 2011.
Hendry is clearly ...
betting on Garza (plus the other additions) putting the Cubs into fringe contention, making a run and garnering fan interest.
I’m not saying it will happen or that it’s a wise move. But the Cubs have a better shot at competing — and drawing fans — in 2011 now than they did.
A better shot at competing, yes
A good shot at competing, doubtful
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 1:43 PM CST up reply actions
Reports are that Hendry thinks Garza is a top-10 arm in all of baseball.
If those reports are accurate, I don’t see the point anymore.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 4:12 PM CST up reply actions
If Hendry thinks Garza is a top-10 arm
That just proves the level of baseball incompetency at the helm of the Chicago Cubs
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies." - Mike Royko
by DTJchris on Jan 8, 2011 7:33 AM CST via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
The debt burden is chump change to the Ricketts
The price appreciation of Ameritrade stock has already made them more than the $400M they borrowed.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
If the Cubs are 8-17
do you see the seats being filled?
Are they more or less likely to be horrible in 2010 having made this trade?
I don’t know about the trade, but empty seats don’t sell Old Style.
tyvm
If it’s that reaally promising lefty, that makes it better.
I don't definitively.
But the name hadn’t been mentioned until somebody brought him up jokingly in the first thread, so I have serious doubts.
I’ll bet you 10 bucks, that it won’t happen. And I don’t think it’s smart to pin your hopes on it.
You're probably right.
But it would be nice to get at least someone who has some upside.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Come on Al
Matt Moore is one of the best prospects in baseball. Someone was just jerking your chain. Clearly he isn’t the unnamed prospect.
Here is Sickels quote:
2) Matt Moore, LHP, Grade A: Best left-handed pitching prospect in baseball not named Aroldis.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 1:50 PM CST up reply actions
Good points in this piece, Al
This isn’t a ‘traded prospects for a nearly washed up guy’. Garza could provide several good years as a stalwart in the rotation. I don’t think you can say, without any doubt, that the prospects traded were going to do that. I say again, list me the Cubs prospects in the last 20 years who have become proven major leaguers. This isn’t a bad deal!
We don't need "proven major leaguers". We need cheap elite talent.
I don’t know if Chris Archer is ever going to be a cheap elite talent.
I know with substantial certainty that Garza will be neither elite, nor particularly cheap.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 12:53 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Is there such a thing
as cheap elite talent. I know Cashner will be cheap, but I don’t know if he’ll be elite any more than you do. It’s not concrete either way, so I guess I’m just surprised at the string of comments that condemn this move.
Yes. Every single MLB star in their first 6 seasons is cost-controlled.
Does no one understand how this works?!
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:07 PM CST up reply actions
Cost controlled is misleading
They are arbitration eligible which still means you have to pay for production
Not for 3 years.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 3:43 PM CST up reply actions
We need cheap elite talent.
Doesn’t exist.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 7, 2011 3:29 PM CST up reply actions
Maybe we could flip Garza for Strasburg after his TJ surgery.
Then trade Kosuke for Jason Heyward.
"All right, you ragtag bunch of misfits! You hate me, and I hate you even more. But without my beloved ringers, you're all I've got. So I want you to remember some inspiring words that someone else might have told you over the course of your lives, and go out there and win!"
by Lord Palmerston on Jan 7, 2011 4:45 PM CST up reply actions
Arger > Garza...Magic!
We basically gave up 1 good prospect and 2 OK prospects to magically turn Archer into a major league pitcher. Yatzee!
If you think there is a better than 50% chance that Archer turns out better than Garza you are pounding the Kool Aid.
You don't think that Archer can post a slightly sub-4.00 ERA over a few years?
I disagree with your premise. I think he might.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Slow down...
Breathe…read…
Better than 50% chance he is better than Garza?
Garza has a number of good years in the toughest division in baseball. I think any sober assessment would say he will have multiple more years under a 4.00 ERA.
So, what are the chances Archer:
>>Starts
>>Has 5-6 seasons under 4.00 ERA
He's also thrown over 200 innings the past two years
if I remember correctly.
Check out the Video Blog I host: WebSmart TV
by digitalbenjamin on Jan 7, 2011 1:22 PM CST up reply actions
You do.
And he came close in 2008.
Contributing Editor, SB Nation Chicago. Please follow us on Twitter!
Any sober assessment
would acknowledge that moving from baseball’s best pitcher’s park (according to run factor) with one of the top defenses to Wrigley with one of the worst defenses will more than mute the change in league.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
Shouldn't the Cubs defense be improved?
No Theriot at short (even for six weeks), no Nady at first or without the ability to throw in the outfield …
Maybe I’m grasping at straws.
age will deteriorate
the defensive skills of Soriano, Pena, Ramirez, and Byrd (whose 2010 season already looks like a ridiculous outlier from a defensive value perspective)
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 2:58 PM CST up reply actions
Are you suggesting
that Soriano can and will get worse?
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
yes
i ensure it
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 6:58 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Sure.
Though, as DCF notes age could matter.
But the Cubs certainly should/could improve from abysmal to mediocre.
Plus Garza is a fairly extreme flyball pitcher… so ballhawk’s defense may be more important that Soriano’s.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
You forget opportunity cost
The Cubs are also going to be spending upwards of $10 million per year on Garza, while Archer will be at the major league minimum the next few season. The Cubs could have used the extra cash to acquire other players.
It’s not as simple as you make it.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 1:13 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Also regarding opportunity cost
The Cubs no longer have Archer (and the others), which means they can’t be used as trading chips if the opportunity to acquire a better player comes along.
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 1:36 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
No kidding
Like maybe an Ace, a 1B 2B or a 3B all of which are higher priorities than a solid #2.
I will be curious to see where Archer and Lee are when Seattle decides to bite the bullet and
trade King Felix in a year or so.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 7, 2011 2:42 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
That's an insane argument.
So we shouldn’t have traded our prospects now (even though there’s a strong chance this is the height of their value) because doing so prohibits us from trading them later?
No
we just traded our prospects for the wrong guy at the wrong time.
by Bradsbeard on Jan 7, 2011 2:48 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Who's the right guy and when is the right time?
And don’t say, “I don’t know and some time in the future.” That’s how cowards make decisions.
Also, remember that there’s no way to know whether or not the Cubs offered the package you’re suggesting for the player sought. Nor is there any way to know if that package would have been good enough.
If that's how "cowards" make decisions
then that means this trade is how foolhardy men make decisions.
Saying “well, we’ve finally got a potential ace in the minors and he’s ready soon… let’s trade him for a guy who has settled in as a solid mid-rotation starter” doesn’t seem terribly wise, either.
You’re right in that you can’t wait in perpetuity… but you can wait for a better situation/deal than this.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
by fsuapollo on Jan 7, 2011 2:55 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
The right guy is someone who can improve the team dramatically
Like Doggie Stalker said – an ace, a 2B, a legit leadoff hitter.
The right time is when that move will push you over the top not move you from 75 wins to 79 wins.
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 2:56 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe
it’s just that I trust our scouting department’s ability to make a decision about one of our own minor league players more than I trust your opinions (no offense) or the Rays’ scouting dept’s opinion.
I don’t have a ton of faith in Archer, but I know almost nothing about him. What I do know is that in deals of prospects for proven guys, I’ll take the proven guy 90% of the time, especially when the prospect is a pitcher.
And I don’t think the platter of guys we gave the Rays was ever going to get us an Ace or a top-flight 2B or leadoff man. Try to have some objectivity when valuing Cubs prospects.
No offense taken
It’s possible that we weren’t going to get much more value than Garza for this package of players. But if trading three of our top 10 prospects (per Baseball America) only gets us a #2-3 type starter in return, doesn’t that speak poorly of our farm system?
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 3:05 PM CST up reply actions
I guess
My point is one of probability. I just don’t see how one can say that it is probable that any of the 5 players traded becomes a player the caliber of Matt Garza (and to be honest, I don’t think terribly highly of Matt Garza).
But statistically, what are the chances that Archer becomes a real contributor to a major league team? What about for Lee? Etc. etc.
(Also, Lee’s value was limited because the Cubs already have a strong young major league SS that they believe in.)
Just out of curiousity...
…why would you trust the Cubs scouts over the Rays scouts?
Contributing Editor, SB Nation Chicago. Please follow us on Twitter!
It's not that I trust one scouts more than the others generally
But I do tend to trust scouts who see a guy every day and can communicate with him and his coaches directly over scouts who see a guy far less frequently and have no such communication.
I like the move
Everybody needs to stop going absolutely insane.
Chicago fan stuck in Florida.
RIP Ron Santo
Yes. Thank you.
I also like the move. They’re going to be fine.
Keep that Q Train rollin' in '11. Let's win it for Ronnie.
The most interesting thing about this move ...
is that this is the first time Hendry has been willing to deal one of the organization’s elite prospects. In addition to hanging onto Hill and Pie, he wouldn’t give up Castro last year when Curtis Granderson was being dangled. There was also a time when he held onto Prior when he could have acquired Miguel Tejada, I believe.
The shift is significant — even if this move doesn’t pan out. Hendry is at least willing to try something different, and I’ll give him a little credit for that.
I’m still largely undecided on this deal. I want to see who the final minor leaguer is, but I do think Garza’s relatively low price tag and lack of a long-term contract is important. Al noted, correctly, that this isn’t like signing a 30-year-old to a 4-year deal.
Maybe it’s worse — maybe 4 years, $40 million would be better than three years, $25 million (or so) and a bunch of good prospects.
I’m torn, frankly.
The Prior-for-Tejada rumored deal...
… was in 2004/05, after Prior had already established himself as a major league pitcher.
I wouldn’t have traded Castro for Granderson, either, and in hindsight that does appear to be the right call.
But after a long time of hanging on to prospects past their “good before” date, Hendry has rolled the dice. I hope he’s right this time.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Standing pat wasn't going to keep him his job.
Maybe this deal will open up Gorzelanny or others for trades that could restock the system.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
EXACTLY
Which is why one can’t help but wonder if Hendry was willing to sacrifice the Cubs future for some job security. Hendry has nothing to lose this year trading prospects.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 7, 2011 2:44 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
There's no need to wonder if he was willing.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
What do you think he has to do to keep his job?
Playoffs or bust?
GM's are in charge of Managers, not the other way around.
Pretty much.
I could see Hendry sticking around if Garza has a good year, the young guys do well and the Cubs finish 86-76 and miss the playoffs.
But Hendry is doubling-down now with this move.
Yep...this is his "all-in" bet...
I’m not opposed to this trade, but, it’s the one that makes or breaks Hendry’s tenure with the Cubs as of 2012, imo.
New strategy for 2011:
"Let's wait for 2 or 3 more years to see if our prospects pan out".
We have heard that for like 3 offseasons.
I think he’s here until his contract expires, and I think that’s because papa Joe doesn’t want to pay 2 GMs. Just a hunch, nothing more.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:31 PM CST up reply actions
So he sacrificed the future in hopes of pushing this team into fringe contention
and saving his job. Sweet.
GM's are in charge of Managers, not the other way around.
That's on Ricketts
Sorry, but if we on this site can recognize that the Cubs weren’t going to contend this year, he should be able to recognize that. He should not have risked having a GM that was desperate to save his job by winning now in charge of the keys to the farm system.
He either needed to extend Hendry or dump him. There was no middle ground.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 1:26 PM CST up reply actions
I agree with that.
If I were in Hendry’s position, I’d do the same. Well, maybe not trade specifically for Garza, but screw the future, I got a job to save.
GM's are in charge of Managers, not the other way around.
To be perfectly honest ...
it probably was all he had left.
Castro for Granderson would have been bad.
I actually think Granderson is a good comp to Garza in terms of overall value. Both are good major league players with some upside but also flaws, whose perceived value is much greater than their actual value.
This a thousand times.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
I just don't understand how
people can be upset about this trade. I’d be more pissed if Hendry did nothing. He did something, if it doesn’t work then bring on the pitchforks and torches, but until then give the guy some credit.
Also to those who say negativity doesn’t affect the team I dare you to tell me otherwise after the 8th inning in game 6. It was all positive thoughts until disaster happened then it became that " here we go again" attitude.
If it was easy it wouldn't be the Cubs.
by Cubbinstrongsince86 on Jan 7, 2011 12:52 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Oh, please.
Players sometimes get nervous because of the idea of the curse. That doesn’t mean that the idea of the curse is furthered by fan negativity.
You can't tell me
that players don’t feed on fans.
If it was easy it wouldn't be the Cubs.
by Cubbinstrongsince86 on Jan 7, 2011 12:57 PM CST up reply actions
really??? you think the cub fans have even a little to do with their lack of success
Unless you are a head case like MB; I don’t think so.
TB didn’t have any fan base & even called their fans out and it didn’t seem to make them play any worse.
''"I always thought I was the most competitive person out there. I never thought I'd find anybody more competitive until I met him.'' Ryan Dempster talking about Ted Lilly
by Madison Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 1:00 PM CST up reply actions
if the fans
don’t believe that they can win it all, how can the players? I just feel that the Cubs fan base is too negative and pessimistic at times.
If it was easy it wouldn't be the Cubs.
by Cubbinstrongsince86 on Jan 7, 2011 1:13 PM CST up reply actions
Good god.
So fan belief is a prerequisite for player confidence?
What planet are you from?
by elgato on Jan 7, 2011 1:14 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
You'd be amazed
at what kind of confidence you’d have if you had 40k+ behind you not to mention millions and millions of people elsewhere believing in your ability. Positivity goes a lot further than negativity does, just saying.
If it was easy it wouldn't be the Cubs.
by Cubbinstrongsince86 on Jan 7, 2011 1:22 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah?
Well, YOU’D be surprised how much positivity would surround the Cubs if they ever got their acts together, built a strong organization and delivered in the clutch.
I agree 100%
if they gave fans a reason to be positive we wouldn’t be having this conversation. All I’m saying is being negative about it isn’t going to improve things. I understand the skepticism and why should we believe in them? Especially when they’ve broken our hearts so many times.
If it was easy it wouldn't be the Cubs.
by Cubbinstrongsince86 on Jan 7, 2011 1:29 PM CST up reply actions
Wow
How do you know what kind of confidence one would have? In 08 many people were quite positive going into the post season
Ghosterbusters II everyone held hands and tried to not have the world end. It did work in the movie. I don’t think that works in the real world.
''"I always thought I was the most competitive person out there. I never thought I'd find anybody more competitive until I met him.'' Ryan Dempster talking about Ted Lilly
by Madison Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 1:34 PM CST up reply actions
From reading peoples
comments on here I’d say not alot.
If it was easy it wouldn't be the Cubs.
by Cubbinstrongsince86 on Jan 7, 2011 1:57 PM CST up reply actions
Philadelphia has some of the nastiest fans in America.
The Phillies seem to be doing fine. New Yorkers aren’t exactly known for their kindness and patience. The Yankees seem to do OK, and the Mets have had more success than the Cubs.
If players crack because fans are booing
Those are players that I don’t want on my team. Jackie Robinson had a Hall of Fame career and had to put up with much worse.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
by Ace Venom on Jan 7, 2011 1:02 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
You don't dismiss failure just because someone tried
Just saying.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
You also don't dismiss a trade as failure before you know whether it is or not.
Just saying.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
History of deals that didn't get the Cubs a pennant
Why should I expect anything more?
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
History of minor league prospects who mostly perform below expectations....
if they ever perform at the big league level at all. I understand what you’re saying, but if you’re using history as your guide, you’re not going to win anything by building through the Cubs’ minor league system either. With large market teams, there has to be a balance of prospects, and proven big league talent acquired via trades and free agency.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
doing something as opposed to nothing
has been the formula for horrific offseasons past
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 1:17 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
"I just don't understand how people can be upset about this trade "
Then you should read some of the posts. Its laid out pretty clearly
"Oh Crap"
-Famous Last Words by General George Custer
by BoVandy on Jan 7, 2011 2:24 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
A big problem with the Pierre deal
is that he was under control for just one season. (Or maybe in Pierre’s case, that was actually an advantage.) But there are three years of control for Garza here.
The biggest problem with the Pierre deal
was it was in part a bit of an act of desperation since they lost out on Furcal as an FA. Hendry had to scramble when he didn’t land Furcal and plan-B simply was not good enough.
Just win the next game...!
This was also a scramble
and reaction to the acquisitions of division and league mates.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
by fsuapollo on Jan 7, 2011 2:58 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
That absolutely makes it better...
but the theory behind that deal was much more sound than this deal. Pierre could have been the piece to push the team over the top. The cost should have been worth the marginal gain. Garza, specifically, can’t do that unless he outshines Cliff Lee and/or Zach Greinke.
And if this deal happened next year, he would just have to be better than Tom Gorzelanny, and I’d be all for it… but not this year.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:04 PM CST up reply actions
I would never like this trade
but I would hate it much less if I felt the Cubs were really in contention. This move isn’t going to make us better than the Reds or Cards so why do it?
If you aren’t in a win NOW mode then you keep your Archer’s to see if they do realize their peak potential
by CalCalender on Jan 7, 2011 12:57 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
And if you're a big-market franchise
you do things like the Cubs just did. Otherwise, you’re Kansas City.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 12:58 PM CST up reply actions
you also do things like
sign Cliff Lee or Carl Crawford.
We are a big market franchise that is half assing going young/contending now. That isnt a great way to win.
Pick a plan and stick with it
by CalCalender on Jan 7, 2011 1:00 PM CST up reply actions 9 recs
I agree with that
one time I would like to see them get a ‘#1 free agent on the market’ guy
Two straight division titles and the best team in the NL in 2008?
"All right, you ragtag bunch of misfits! You hate me, and I hate you even more. But without my beloved ringers, you're all I've got. So I want you to remember some inspiring words that someone else might have told you over the course of your lives, and go out there and win!"
by Lord Palmerston on Jan 7, 2011 2:29 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
burn
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 7, 2011 2:34 PM CST up reply actions
do you even know how ignorant of an argument that is?
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 7, 2011 2:41 PM CST up reply actions
Please, enlighten me.
Soriano has been a bust. In the postseason, he batted .143 and .071. He was a big reason the Cubs went nowhere in the playoffs. Hardly what a “#1 free agent on the market guy” is supposed to do. In fact. many times the top free agents don’t live up to the hype. A great example of this is Barry Zito. Many of the best free agent signings are middle of the pack guys…
Barry Zito's in his garage right now shining his WS ring...
…laughing at you.
Nobody cares about your fantasy baseball team
by carmen_fanzone on Jan 7, 2011 3:29 PM CST up reply actions
No thanks to him...
He was left off the post season roster. But hey, he does have a ring and $126 million dollars so I can’t hate…
You must hate every Cubs signing since 2006 then.
Like that bum, Ted Lilly. We paid him $40M for two first-round playoff sweeps.
Whoopee.
"All right, you ragtag bunch of misfits! You hate me, and I hate you even more. But without my beloved ringers, you're all I've got. So I want you to remember some inspiring words that someone else might have told you over the course of your lives, and go out there and win!"
by Lord Palmerston on Jan 7, 2011 4:43 PM CST up reply actions
Off-topic
Lilly was a middle of the road free agent to start with. Plus, one pitcher doesn’t make a series…
I like you.
"All right, you ragtag bunch of misfits! You hate me, and I hate you even more. But without my beloved ringers, you're all I've got. So I want you to remember some inspiring words that someone else might have told you over the course of your lives, and go out there and win!"
by Lord Palmerston on Jan 7, 2011 7:13 PM CST up reply actions
You two should get married
"A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality." John Lennon
"My favorite food is Macaroni and Cheese, from the blue box." Geovany Soto
"They played like son of a guns......lord have mercy." Mike Quade
Actually I liked both the Lilly and DeRosa signings at the time
They were good fits for the Cubs who were on the upswing.
This deal seems like a desperate attempt to stay competitive.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
The Ricketts Must Be Hamstrung
I don’t think they have a lot of money to spend now. That’s one of several reasons why the Cubs aren’t the Phillies or Red Sox.
2011 - The 103rd time is the charm.
Ricketts are awash in money
The price appreciation in their Ameritrade stock has already made them the $400M they borrowed to buy the Cubs.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
The Ricketts family sold
49M shares on 2/20/09 at $11.85 to provide their contribution to purchase the Cubs. Since then the stock has risen to $19.65. They still own over 50M shares in AMTD.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
Amen, my brother from another mother.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
This looks like more of a Mets move
If you want that sort of big market comparison. I’d rather emulate the Yankees and Red Sox, kthx.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
by Ace Venom on Jan 7, 2011 1:00 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Actually, this is a lot like something Kansas City would do
Bringing in a guy who’ll give your team a marginal upgrade, but not enough to make you a contender – Kansas City’s been doing that for years.
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 1:05 PM CST up reply actions
Look everyone! Gil Meche!
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:14 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
NBF
I agree with you, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it.
I wish for just one year the Cubs didn’t make a splash.. this isn’t exactly a splash but you get my point.
''"I always thought I was the most competitive person out there. I never thought I'd find anybody more competitive until I met him.'' Ryan Dempster talking about Ted Lilly
by Madison Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 1:06 PM CST up reply actions
LOL on your first sentence
Strange bedfellows.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 1:08 PM CST up reply actions
Thanks we don't often agree :)
But part of this whole discussion could be
What is expected out of large market teams in general?
Furthermore what is expected when you have a payroll larger some some countries GNP and can’t beat the pirates @ Wrigley.
''"I always thought I was the most competitive person out there. I never thought I'd find anybody more competitive until I met him.'' Ryan Dempster talking about Ted Lilly
by Madison Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 1:23 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
The Pirates thing was baffling
but, as they say, that’s baseball.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 1:33 PM CST up reply actions
Obviously, we disagree.
Big market franchises hold on to their top talent, and use their $$ advantage to fill in the gaps with free agents.
For example, in the 90’s, the Yanks held on to Jeter-Rivera-Posada-Pettite, and added parts from outside. Now they’re holding on to Hughes. The Red Sox held on to Lester, Buchholz, Ellsbury, Pedroia, and Papelbon, and added a parade of top bats like Manny and Papi and (later) Beltre and Gonzalez.
The Cubs trade their top prospects for middle-rotation guys in an attempt to say they’re keeping up.
Kansas City trades their players when they get too expensive, in order to get more prospects, who will in turn be traded when they’re too expensive.
It’s a subtle difference, but I think you can grasp it.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:14 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Apparently
The Cubs must not value Archer (who came over in the DeRosa trade, BTW) as much as you do. Last I checked, they still had Castro, Cashner, B. Jackson, etc.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 2:21 PM CST up reply actions
Sound Argument...
I think the only counter is to hope that the Cubs were accurate in their assessment that Archer won’t be dominant in 2 years.
I’m glad they have Cashner though.
So the Red Sox gave up a bunch of over the hill players
to get Gonzalez? Cuz we all know that big market teams ALWAYS hang onto their young talent and just fill in with free agents.
Of course,
Texiera, Sabathia, etc must just be fill in players as well.
by 100 Years is Nothing on Jan 7, 2011 3:25 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Please don't tell me
You are comparing Garza to those players?
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies." - Mike Royko
by DTJchris on Jan 8, 2011 7:56 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
They don't get it...
Not much else to say.
Too many here are looking at this trade in a vacuum.
Just win the next game...!
The Cubs are in a tough spot though
Ticket prices are high. You have to put some effort into the offseason with a big-market ball club. Honestly, this has been one of the quieter off-seasons for the Cubs.
They did that...
when they made shrewd moves to bring in Wood and Pena on the cheap and held on to their young talent and established roles to nurture them into the stars of the next Cubs World Series contender. They just blew a big part of that on this deal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:06 PM CST up reply actions
$10M for a sub .200 hitter
always seemed rather unshrewd to me.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
I guess that's where the line is drawn....
and what the big issue of disagreement is among Cub fans. If you’re like me, you’re always in a win now mode. I don’t believe in two, three, or five year plans. Never have. And that attitude comes from my background of waiting for such plans to pan out. I want to always go into Spring Training thinking we can win the World Series THIS YEAR. To me, I’ll taken proven Major League talent over minor league potential about 99% of the time.
Now understand, by “win now” I’m not saying I don’t believe in building through the farm system. And I like the way the system seems to be improving (Castro, Soto, Marmol, Colvin, Marshall, etc). But I also feel that sometimes you have to roll the dice on trading prospects for guys who you know what you’re getting. I’ve just seen to many “sure things” from the Cubs system never pan out to pin my hopes on building a world championships team from the minor league ranks.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
I agree with this view, ct
Building from within and obtaining from elsewhere are exactly what a sensible, big-market team should be doing. This is why I say a lot of Cubs fans seem to think this is KC or Pittsburgh.
If you’re in the Cubs’ situation, you need to try to contend every season. If you keep knocking on the door, eventually it’s going to open.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 1:15 PM CST up reply actions
Contrary to popular belief
The Yankees contended for years because they drafted well and built around the core of Jeter, Posada, Pettitte, and Rivera. They got a few World Series out of this strategy too. Yes they went out and spent a bunch of money, but this isn’t the dawn of free agency anymore. They spent money on the right pieces and won around the right core of players.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
A Lot Different Than the Bronx Zoo Days
Outside of Thurman Munson and Ron Guidry, how many homegrown products were a major factor on those 1977-78 championship teams? Spending a lot of money doesn’t guarantee even a .500 season these days.
2011 - The 103rd time is the charm.
doesn't every team need to try and contend?
''"I always thought I was the most competitive person out there. I never thought I'd find anybody more competitive until I met him.'' Ryan Dempster talking about Ted Lilly
by Madison Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 1:24 PM CST up reply actions
see (Pirates, Pittsburgh)
or (Royals, Kansas City)
So, in 2007, go ahead and trade Soto to replace Michael Barrett, right?
You have to build from within, too. Those cheap players allow you to go sign Carl Crawfords and CC Sabathias.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:16 PM CST up reply actions
I agree that you have to build from within too.
Read my post….I said that. And when you look at our Major League roster, we are starting to build from within. But no major market team has 9 position players, and 5 quality starting pitchers in their rotation who are all home grown. Honestly, I understand your point. I really do. But you’re acting like Archer was the end-all, be-all. He might turn out to be good. But ask yourself this: Garza is under team control for 3 years, and is a good #2 starter. What you’re pinning your hopes on is that within three years, Archer will be the legitimate ace of our big league starting rotation, because you seem to think he has much more of an upside than Garza. Now, based on the Cubs history of minor league prospects panning out, are you honestly telling me that you are confident enough in Archer’s potential upside that you would not have made this trade for a bonafide #2 starter who is also moving from the AL East to the NL Central? Leave all other players out of it, because this trade was essentially Garza for Archer. I’m sorry, potential or no potential, I make that trade every day of the week and twice on Sunday. Maybe it comes back to blow up in my face, but I like the odds that it comes back more in the Cubs favor. I like Garza pitching against the Reds, Astros, Pirates, Cards, and Brewers a lot more than Archer pitching against the Yanks, Sox, and Blue Jays.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
I don't care about acquiring middle-rotation starters. At all. They are always, always available.
I care about acquiring top-of-rotation starters. Which Garza is not, and which Archer may or may not be.
The odds of ONE of Archer, Cashner and McNutt being that guy are higher than the odds of one of Cashner and McNutt being that guy.
I absolutely don’t see what Matt Garza brings to this team, other than more of what we already have.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:43 PM CST up reply actions
OK. Well, we'll have to agree to disagree.
I look at it this way: We have a rotation now of Z, Garza, Dempster, Wells, and Silva/Gorzo. Now that we have Kerry Wood as the righty setup guy, I like the odds of Cashner being converted to a starter, making the rotation as the #5 guy, and working his way up from there. If that happens, Gorzo will probably be traded, since Silva is virtually untradeable. You still have guys like Coleman, McNutt, and need I say a Dark Horse like Spellcheck (I’m not holding my breath, but you never know) as possible rotation insurance. Sure I would have liked Archer to be in the mix. And I agree there is no bonafide ace in there, at least not yet. Next year when we’re back on the free agent market, I think we’ll get one. And as you said, you never know where McNutt, or Cashner may go. But it could be nowhere. Prospects are always a risk, and I guess you and I disagree on how to manage that risk. But some of the good ones are always going to be traded. That’s simply part of the game.
"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004
Yeah thats the thing
If Garza had back to back years of 15 and 17 wins, I would get jazzed on this deal. The guy is 42-44 lifetime and the Hendry and the Cubs gave away two of there biggest chips for a 3 starter.
Win ands losses?
You are not seriously arguing win and losses as the indication of a pitcher’s value. You can’t be. I refuse to believe anyone is still doing that. Next you’ll tell me you are a Joe Morgan fan.
by californiachicagoan on Jan 7, 2011 5:03 PM CST up reply actions
yet you argued
the cubs are contenders off of a 40 game sample mostly made up of meaningless games in september
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 6:51 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm against the deal but some perspective
For those who are ripping giving up Archer (like I am), remember that Matt Garza was the #21 prospect in all of baseball in 2007. So if you think Archer is going to rank somewhere around there (I think he’ll be around there, probably a bit lower), you need to remember that Garza was Chris Archer four years ago.
And the Twins...
got a former #1 overall pick for him… and it was considered a bad deal at the time to give up Garza and Bartlett. Much like this is now. This is the Rays pulling the same bit of robbery on us that they did on the Twins. They’re giving up an overvalued asset that they don’t really need anymore for potential and cost savings. They are getting the best of this deal regardless of how Garza and Archer turn out.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:10 PM CST up reply actions
Based on what?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:19 PM CST up reply actions
Delmon Young alone.
Jason Pridie and Brendan Harris are [were] below average, but not wasted roster space. So I think the Twins got great upside when they sent Garza to Tampa.
"I'm not a broadcaster! I'm me!"--Ron Santo
Along with Jason Bartlett
who turned into an all-star who helped get them to the World Series.
You are the only person I’ve seen try to argue the Twins got fair value in this deal… at the time and in hindsight. Especially considering Delmon Young hasn’t performed to the level of a #1 overall pick.
The Rays traded something they didn’t need for something they did… which is exactly what they’ve done with this trade too.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:31 PM CST up reply actions
I get where you are going with it
But considering the Cubs are rebuilding and tightening the ol’ budget belt, wouldn’t it make more sense to keep the younger guy that is really cheap the next few years. Granted Garza isn’t super expensive, but he is still not cheap.
Especially when you have to give up your 2nd best positional prospect and some nice organizational depth.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 1:17 PM CST up reply actions
And we gave him up with another top prospect
and a bit of useful trade chips. Cubs could have been patient kept Archer had literally 25 million more to spend in the next 3 years and kept Lee and the others.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 7, 2011 2:49 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Although we lost top prospects
you got to realize, Garza went 15-10 with a 3.91 ERA in the AL EAST. Not to mention vs the Yanks – 8.10 , and Boston – 5.14. A switch the the NL Central will help Garza tremendously and he will be an even more effective pitcher in the national league.
by Dave Gottschalk on Jan 7, 2011 12:58 PM CST reply actions
baseball is still baseball
outside of the AL East. Its not like he will suddenly become Cy Young because he moved divisions. The NL Central has some good hitters too
He's also moving to a much worse park for pitchers
And will now be pitching in front of a weaker defensive team.
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 1:00 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
But he still won't have to face A-Rod or Youkilis 6 times per game like he did in the AL East.
"All right, you ragtag bunch of misfits! You hate me, and I hate you even more. But without my beloved ringers, you're all I've got. So I want you to remember some inspiring words that someone else might have told you over the course of your lives, and go out there and win!"
by Lord Palmerston on Jan 7, 2011 1:02 PM CST up reply actions
now he faces
Pujols, Holliday, Price Fielder, Braun, Votto ect
He seemed to get mauled by the good teams.
I don’t really care that he owned Baltimore.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:18 PM CST up reply actions
if he can beat the Pirates @ Wrigley won't that be a win/ win
sarcasm alert
''"I always thought I was the most competitive person out there. I never thought I'd find anybody more competitive until I met him.'' Ryan Dempster talking about Ted Lilly
by Madison Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 1:25 PM CST up reply actions
He won't be facing the Cubs either....
Heyyyyyy-O!
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
So it appears he got pounded by the good teams in the AL East, and didn't have to face TBD.
Why, exactly, are we giving this guy props for his performance vs. BAL and TOR?
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:17 PM CST up reply actions
And the Brewers got someone who went 13-8 with a 3.64 ERA in the AL East
for one top prospect. I’m fine with trading prospects, I just think Hendry overpaid. He paid the Ray’s price when he should have waited.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
Probably cause Hendry is a bad GM
And other teams’ GMs know this and use it to their advantage to fleece us on trades.
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies." - Mike Royko
by DTJchris on Jan 8, 2011 8:08 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
The main thing
The main thing is they have him for 3 years. I’d have a big problem if given the state of the team if this was a one year rental.
Hendry obviously sees him as a part of an overall plan.
And he’s 27 and most players hit their prime around 28.
Formerly known as cubstoseriesby100. Thanks Al for letting me change my outdated screenname.
Hendry has a plan?
Exciting times, people!
GM's are in charge of Managers, not the other way around.
by shoemile on Jan 7, 2011 1:13 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
3 more years
To me, that is an important factor in all of this. Whether Garza becomes our Ace or what ever ranking others want to give him, I like the fact that we have him for 3 years. Are the Cubs going to be forced to stick with a 2nd base platoon, for longer than I prefer, since we traded Lee? Maybe.
Yes, we gave up three top 10 prospects, but what have they done for me lately? Without really knowing anything about the two minor league players were are getting in return, I’m being neutral about my thoughts.
I’m going to play the wait and see approach. I could be waiting awhile.
Just read the first line, then comment.
But he's not cheap anymore
The Cubs are dealing with a reduced budget. The money they spend on Garza can’t be spent on other players. Garza has to pay out-perform Archer over the next 3 years to make this deal worth it.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 1:18 PM CST up reply actions
I'm don't disagree
This is why I’m interested in reading your article later about the deal/prospects.
Just read the first line, then comment.
With pictures and videos, too...
…nothing half-assed.
New strategy for 2011:
"Let's wait for 2 or 3 more years to see if our prospects pan out".
I want a pro/con debate between Al and D98 in there too
GM's are in charge of Managers, not the other way around.
Also let's face it
The Cubs could trade Wellington Castillo for Albert Pujols and people wouldn’t like the trade.
Formerly known as cubstoseriesby100. Thanks Al for letting me change my outdated screenname.
I'd spit out my drink if that happened
That would be a great trade.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
That's just asinine
Most of the people hating this trade, were in favor of Carlos Pena and Kerry Wood.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 1:18 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Oh my god the strawmen on this site.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:19 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
And the Cubs could trade Starlin Castro for Aaron Miles and some people would defend the move.
Is that how this game is played?
GM's are in charge of Managers, not the other way around.
by shoemile on Jan 7, 2011 1:21 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
And
And in reverse the Cubs could trade Starlin Castro for Billy Bob thudpucker and people would defend it.
I’m just saying no matter what is done people will dislike or like it.
I was exaggerating to make a point.
The fact is to call this a bad or a good trade is kind of silly right now. we won’t know for 3 years.
And as far as the prospects go if the Cubs win a series with Garza as a huge reason the guys we trade for him could go on and win the next combined 20 Cy Youngs/MVPS.
And maybe I’m just jaded with prospects having had my heart broken 22382901382108301830998390138901983108138190382089382013801289830183013820913820193 times.
Formerly known as cubstoseriesby100. Thanks Al for letting me change my outdated screenname.
by puckishcubsfan on Jan 7, 2011 2:25 PM CST up reply actions
Hey, hey, hey!
Thudpucker is a bona fide ace! That guy throws smoke! I’d make that deal every day of the week and twice on Sundays!
Contributing Editor, SB Nation Chicago. Please follow us on Twitter!
How did I know that Al Yellon would support the move?
Well, aside from the fact that he supports every Cubs move.
by kanderber on Jan 7, 2011 1:02 PM CST reply actions 7 recs
"WHY THE THING THE CUBS JUST DID IS A GOOD MOVE FOR THE CUBS"
How many times have we seen the “Al Yellon about-face headline” in the last 3 years? More than 10?
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:20 PM CST up reply actions 5 recs
How did I know that virtually everyone here would hate this move?
Well, aside from the fact that virtually everyone here hates everything the Cubs do.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
by Al Yellon on Jan 7, 2011 1:22 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
I don't hate everything that the Cubs do
I just hate the bad moves.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
I seem to remember some praise for the Wood deal.
And for the Pena deal, too.
Some.
And I did say “virtually”. And I was riffing off the bash of me.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I don't know if I'd count the Wood deal
If his name were Kerry Jones and he never had played for the Cubs, I suspect the complaints would have been numerous.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 6:54 PM CST up reply actions
Are you suggesting that
the vast majority of Cub fans are predisposed to bitching. Perhaps they feel that history has proven their judgment hasbeen better than many of Cubs management team.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
Proof? Cite?
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
Exactly
Just look at various threads and you’d have all the evidence you need. (And I’m not even talking about game threads. Those are in a league of their own, pardon the pun.)
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 8, 2011 12:30 PM CST up reply actions
If you're expecting
to prove something that applies to the vast majority, you’re going to have to do much better than that. Your so-called evidence is laughable.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
by tharr on Jan 8, 2011 2:03 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
the sidebar on the kerry wood signing
should be an easy indication that not everyone hates every cubs move
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 1:24 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Because, in general, it's...
a bad idea to trade three of your top 10 prospects for a league average pitcher?
Oh come on.
Some people love every move. Some hate every move. Focus on the people with a coherent thought.
I loved the Kerry Wood move, am in slight agreement with the Pena move.
I don’t hate this move because of the move… I am dismayed BECAUSE OF THE PRICE.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
by fsuapollo on Jan 7, 2011 3:06 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I think the frustrating part is Al
The Cubs finally after 300 years get some decent, quality depth in the system and they unload two of there top 3 prospects for a guy who is a 3 starter. To me, this is not hard to understand.
This just smells wrong.
I don't hate the move
I just think we could have done it without giving up both lee and archer
sidebar poll
shows majority likes the trade
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 8:47 PM CST up reply actions
He's in the middle of compiling his next column
A list of “Zambrano’s Most Selfish Quotes”
"All right, you ragtag bunch of misfits! You hate me, and I hate you even more. But without my beloved ringers, you're all I've got. So I want you to remember some inspiring words that someone else might have told you over the course of your lives, and go out there and win!"
by Lord Palmerston on Jan 7, 2011 1:06 PM CST up reply actions 4 recs
I don't read him for a reason
I think there are many posters here that could write far better than him.
''"I always thought I was the most competitive person out there. I never thought I'd find anybody more competitive until I met him.'' Ryan Dempster talking about Ted Lilly
by Madison Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 1:10 PM CST up reply actions
Eh, we'll see how it is.
Based on Cubs prospects in the past, it seems like we overvalue our minor leaguers. I remember when Gregg was traded for Ceda two years ago, and everyone was clamoring (including myself) about how bad that deal is. Now, Ceda hasn’t amounted for much. The only trade where it it has really come back to bite us is Nolasco for Pierre, although Pierre seemed like a perfect fit at the time.
Regardless, I think we made a good trade here. Garza may be Lilly-esque in the NL Central, and we never know how good prospects are going to be. We were thinking of trading some o those prospects for Chris Davis. By only really giving up Archer for Garza, I’d say we won because we didn’t include Cashner, Vitters, or Jackson.
Our rotation stands at Zambrano, Garza, Dempster, Wells, Silva, and Gorzelanny. I’d expect Gorzy to be traded or go to the pen, or for someone to take Silva (I’d love that). Otherwise, it adds depth to our pitching rotation without giving much in return.
Hendry did well here.
Viva la Cubs Révolution!!!
The Gregg trade was bad for a different reason
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
It was bad because we were replacing a Solid Kerry Wood with what Hendry thought would be a cheaper but same productivity level
But if you just look at the trade on face value, it really didn’t advance or hinder the Cubs.
Viva la Cubs Révolution!!!
Not having a closer put the Cubs out of contention in 2009
I’d say that was a big deal.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
I agree that was one reason why that team underperformed
But if you take a look at my point that many fans were upset that Ceda was traded away but he hasn’t done much to prove himself. I think Cub fans like to overvalue their prospects.
Viva la Cubs Révolution!!!
All three parts of that trade were bad.
Gregg was overrated and helped by pitching in Florida.
Wood wanted to come back for cheaper, something he reinforced this offseason.
Ceda was a volatile asset, but still an asset they gave away for far less than full value.
Sometimes prospects don’t turn out the way they should, but they still have value and the Cubs have had a hard time getting what they deserve out of their “top ten”, even if they’re able to fleece the Pirates every once in a while.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:14 PM CST up reply actions
Ceda was wildly inconsistent
He was a favorite of fans in love with Ks. He was also a temperamental pitcher who still has the same problem……far too many walks.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
True, which is why I said I'd love that to happen, though forgot to mention its unreleastic
Most likely Gorzzy goes
Viva la Cubs Révolution!!!
Per FanGraphs
In 2010 Gorzelanny was a 2.3 WAR pitcher. Garza was a 1.8 WAR pitcher.
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 1:08 PM CST up reply actions
Yes
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
Well we aren't trading away Garza
and Garza does have the AL East factor, and he has playoff experience.
Viva la Cubs Révolution!!!
Playoff experience doesn't mean anything
The Cubs had players with World Series experience on their roster and still couldn’t get past the first round in 2007 and 2008.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
Well considering the AL East factor,
These were against the two powerhouses
Yankees: 3 starts, 16.2 IP, 15 ER, 8.33 ERA
Red Sox: 34.1 innings, 20 ER, 5.24 ERA
You take that out, Garza has a 2.89 ERA. I’d take that any day!!
Viva la Cubs Révolution!!!
Take out the infamous botched double play
And the Cubs win the pennant in 2003. Yay. We can play this game all day.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
If we could create some kind of Baltimore/Toronto based division, awesome!
I think those stats pretty much tank the whole “AL East” factor. He was on one of the 3 good teams, and got knocked around by the other 2.
It makes Marcum’s season look that much better.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:25 PM CST up reply actions
Well Sadly we do have one
The Astros and Pirates are similar teams to the Orioles and Blue Jays, I’d argue. In addition, the Red Sox and Yankees are much better than the Cardinals, Reds, and Brewers offenses.
Viva la Cubs Révolution!!!
He also has
experience pitching worse away from Tropicana Field, where he won’t get to pitch anymore.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:14 PM CST up reply actions
Go look up the numbers yourself...
they’re bad. Tropicana Field helped mask his problems. It’s a wash for him to move away from the AL East and Tropicana at the same time.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:19 PM CST up reply actions
+1
Tropicana Field was the best pitchers park in baseball in 2010, even better than Petco Park. Wrigley Field was the third worst pitchers park in 2010.
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 1:24 PM CST up reply actions
Historical WAR's for Gorz and Garza
Gorz: 2.9, -1.0, 0.7, 2.3. (I’m only counting since he became a fulltime member)
Garza: 2.9, 3.2, 1.8.
Also:
29 Starts is Gorz’s career high last year.
Garza has started 30+ games three years running.
I do not think the Cubs are a guaranteed fourth this year. They have a solid rotation, arguably the best 3-5 starting rotation in the division, solid relief pitching, and a dynamite closer. Ramirez is due a return to form to a 3+ WAR player rather than the 0.9 he was last year. DeWitt is a clear upgrade over anything we had last year. I think the other clubs have enough holes that the Cubs will be competitive.
[...]when Giants coach Steve Owen, a certified defensive genius, was asked how he planned to stop Nagurski, he said: "With a shotgun, as he’s leaving the dressing room."
by NobodySpecial on Jan 7, 2011 1:22 PM CST up reply actions
I hate that
“The Cubs will be competitive”. The goal needs to be more. The PIrates goal is to be competitive. Do you think the Red Sox goal each year is to be competitive? I bet Kenny Williams’ goal isn’t to be competitive.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
consider the context
we have to wait out some big back-loaded deals, and a lot of players played below expectations last year.
Hopefully, the latter will revert to expected levels while we wait for the former to be finished.
Forget all that other stuff. I gotta believe.
by drewishdrewid on Jan 7, 2011 4:17 PM CST up reply actions
Urgh, that Jonah Keri article
makes me really hate the deal, and reaffirms my belief that Garza just isn’t worth it.
“The Next Aaron Harang”
by Josh Timmers on Jan 7, 2011 1:05 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
Matt Garza is amazing!
He will be the piece that puts the Cubs over the top! Jim Hendry did great to get him! Jim Hendry is amazing!
Is that a good TJ impression?
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
That's like doing a good Roseanne Barr impersonation.
Even if you can do it well, nobody wants to hear it.
"Enough foreplay- let's get crackin'"- Fred Garvin
Dave Cameron wrote the Harang piece...
Keri wrote the Cubs will still finish in fourth place even with Garza piece. I agree with both of them.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:15 PM CST up reply actions
Apparently
An awful lot of writers are stupid enough to think this trade is only to impact 2011.
That’s the difference to me by the way. I’d be POed for a one year rental.
Formerly known as cubstoseriesby100. Thanks Al for letting me change my outdated screenname.
by puckishcubsfan on Jan 7, 2011 2:27 PM CST up reply actions
Depends on why we're renting
If we were giving this up to rent a player for next year when the rest of the team looked solid enough to compete for the World Series, then I’m all for it.
They’re not stupid. They’re a far lot smarter than you or I, and they know what they’re talking about. They’re including 2012 and 13 in their analysis… but it’s impossible to really know how this will impact those two years on a team that already had sufficient starting pitching and still needs better offense and defense and now is without two of their best trading chips to improve it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 2:31 PM CST up reply actions
Wow...
I really have to recommend this. I couldn’t articulate my thoughts on this any better.
by Damen Jackson on Jan 7, 2011 1:14 PM CST up reply actions
I like Garza
but this is why I don’t like the deal. The only way this deal works is if we can land a TOR type guy next year.
Boom
That is what the Buster Olney’s of the world are ignoring. Not that the Cubs didn’t get a good player, but that he doesn’t really fit with their timetable for contention.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 1:20 PM CST up reply actions
So
So they aren’t planning on contending for at least 3 years?
And we don’t exactly have the 27 Yankees in the Nl Central in 2011 either.
Formerly known as cubstoseriesby100. Thanks Al for letting me change my outdated screenname.
by puckishcubsfan on Jan 7, 2011 2:28 PM CST up reply actions
havent read the article yet
but that headlines sums up my exact thoughts
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 1:21 PM CST up reply actions
While he makes some valid points...
… it’s not as if the system is completely barren, is it?
There are still quite a few good prospects left.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
we just dealt 4 of the top 12, according to Kevin Goldstein
that’s a hit
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 1:25 PM CST up reply actions
4 of the top 12
One hasn’t thrown a pitch in the minors yet, one might be leaning toward football.
GM's are in charge of Managers, not the other way around.
It doesn't matter how many prospects the Cubs still have.
Just because the Cubs have a lot of prospects doesn’t make it right to overpay for someone the Cubs didn’t need right now.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
by rlpete on Jan 7, 2011 1:44 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Are you freaking kidding me with this?
Good god dude, for someone who was against a deal like this YESTERDAY, you have certainly swung 180 for no discernible reason.
"Oh Crap"
-Famous Last Words by General George Custer
Pretty sure he's a Cubs fan as well.
And he nailed it. I liked one of the comments about putting a band-aid on a team missing a leg. That analogy works for me.
Yeah... that.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
This might literally be the first time I've ever thought Kevin Kaduk was more than some
clownshoes blogger who got his job simply by lucking into it.
I was actually going to post this exact article.
"Oh Crap"
-Famous Last Words by General George Custer
I kind of enjoyed his book when I read it some years back.
Although he came across as somewhat self-absorbed with all his talk about hitting on girls. I was insanely jealous that he could afford to just spend a summer doing nothing but taking in Cubs games for cheap and partying. As a guy in your young 20’s, that sounds like a fantastic way to spend a summer.
I couldn't relate to his book
It was simply a journal of drunkenness and ogling women. I see enough obnoxious drunk guys at Wrigley without having to read an entire book glorifying it. Big disappointment.
Let's see
An aging Mark DeRosa (traded in part for Archer), another overhyped Asian position player, and three guys fighting for roster spots let alone playing time for a bonafide and durable starting pitcher coming over to the NL?
Count me in on a trade like that. Every, single, day. Well done Hendry.
"When the day comes with that last winning run and I'm crying and covered in beer. I'll look to the sky and know I was right to think someday we'll go all the way." - Vedder
OK, I'm signing off for now
because everything I wrote for the MSP Cubs Annual now has to be re-written and like by today. But I’ll be back later with the synopses of the four players in the deal that made my top 20 lists. So essentially, you’re going to get what would have been in the MSP Annual for free.
I think I’ll burn the Archer and Chirinos articles. Is there a way of setting my hard drive on fire without destroying everything?
I'm sorry to hear that Josh :(
''"I always thought I was the most competitive person out there. I never thought I'd find anybody more competitive until I met him.'' Ryan Dempster talking about Ted Lilly
by Madison Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 1:11 PM CST up reply actions
I can print them out and mail them to you for burning.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Maybe you can sell the Archer and Chirinos articles...
…to someone writing for the Tampa Bay Rays MSP annual. (I’m assuming there is one, anyway…)
Contributing Editor, SB Nation Chicago. Please follow us on Twitter!
ITS YOUR FAULT
Hendry did this just to annoy you Josh.
This is like the huge article I wrote about how to save the show Guiding Light finished 12 minutes before it’s cancellation was announced.
Formerly known as cubstoseriesby100. Thanks Al for letting me change my outdated screenname.
by puckishcubsfan on Jan 7, 2011 2:30 PM CST up reply actions
I'd love to read
the Archer and Chirinos articles. I’m sure many others feel the same.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
I'll see what the legalities are regarding those.
I’ll see if I can work it out so that Josh can post them here.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I hadn't thought of any legal implications
Thanks for your help.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
Will he wear 22?
That number has not served recent Cubs well (I.e. Prior and Hart)
Viva la Cubs Révolution!!!
Pena already has #22.
So maybe it’s better that a pitcher take a different number.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
That number
That number is terrible. Wasn’t Harkey 22 too?
Either cursed as a Cub or afterwwards. Remember Buckner was 22!
Formerly known as cubstoseriesby100. Thanks Al for letting me change my outdated screenname.
by puckishcubsfan on Jan 7, 2011 2:30 PM CST up reply actions
This is so stupid to argue.
Although I realize it’s fun in the middle of January to do so.
At the end of the day, we won’t know who the winners and losers are for a few years. It’s not overwhelming good or bad for one side, if you ask me.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
by cubswynn on Jan 7, 2011 1:13 PM CST reply actions 11 recs
REC THIS!!
Good heavens, people, stop exemplifying the worst qualities of the Internet. How can every deal be THE WORST THING EVER and also WHAT A GREAT MOVE all the time, for every move?! Doesn’t that bother anyone else?
Jesus.
Go Cubs.
"From childhood's hour I have not been as others were - I have not seen as others saw." - Alone, Edgar Allan Poe
Really, we'll never know who won the deal until everyone involved is dead.
I mean, there are so many factors at play. Best to not make any judgments or hold any opinions whatsoever until we are totally sure.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 4:19 PM CST up reply actions
Argue. Judge. Hold opinions. Do whatever you want.
Like I said, I understand it’s fun to do in the middle of January when there isn’t anything else going on. But no one is going to “win” their side of the argument. So have at it if that’s fun for you. Me, I’ll keep my opinions to myself and wait to judge. It’s not worth my time.
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
by cubswynn on Jan 7, 2011 4:57 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm with you, cubs
it’s sort of fun scrolling through the angst but in the end… meh. Time will tell.
I like this deal..
Garza could very well be the Cubs’ best starter next season. I see no problem with getting a valuable Top 3 rotation guy for prospects who may or may not pan out. Especially given Zambrano’s recent “issues”. There is no way you can count on him as your “ace” any longer.
"that wouldn't be a home run in a phone booth."
I don't think anyone is counting on Z or Garza to be the ace.
GM's are in charge of Managers, not the other way around.
Gordo says it's done.
http://twitter.com/cst_cubs/status/23452830010441729
With a little bragging about his story on Tuesday.
Didn't someone state earlier
that they jumped then gun and that there was in fact no pitching prospect coming back?
by English Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 1:39 PM CST up reply actions
Could be
a player who can’t formally be traded yet, like someone drafted in 2010.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
Posted above, but here's the AL East Factor
These were against the two powerhouses
Yankees: 3 starts, 16.2 IP, 15 ER, 8.33 ERA
Red Sox: 6 starts, 34.1 innings, 20 ER, 5.24 ERA
You take that out, Garza has a 2.89 ERA. I’d take that any day!! Granted, he will give up runs against the Cardinals and Reds, but it shows he becomes a much better pitcher when he leaves the AL East and goes to the mediocre NL Central. May even be like Ted Lilly.
Viva la Cubs Révolution!!!
So... he's good against Baltimore?
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:28 PM CST up reply actions
I traded a walkman for an iPod.
Then I traded the iPod for a CD player.
Walkman for CD player essentially…not bad!
"All right, you ragtag bunch of misfits! You hate me, and I hate you even more. But without my beloved ringers, you're all I've got. So I want you to remember some inspiring words that someone else might have told you over the course of your lives, and go out there and win!"
by Lord Palmerston on Jan 7, 2011 2:35 PM CST up reply actions
Keith Law's take
http://insider.espn.go.com/mlb/blog?name=law_keith&id=5999067
Opening of the article in quotes
The parameters of the deal that ESPNChicago.com’s Bruce Levine reported has Matt Garza headed to the Cubs in exchange for pitcher Chris Archer, outfielder Brandon Guyer, catcher Robinson Chirinos, shortstop Hak-Ju Lee and outfielder Sam Fuld. Minor league outfielder Fernando Perez will also head to Chicago with Garza.
[+] EnlargeMatt Garza
Kim Klement/US PresswireGarza is a prize, and the Cubs paid like it.
Immediate reaction: Starting with the prospects, I love this trade for Tampa Bay. They got more for Garza than Kansas City did for Zack Greinke, although their package of players is, collectively, further away than what the Royals got. It looks to me like the Rays focused less on position and more on overall value.
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 1:35 PM CST reply actions
Law had Lee as the Cubs #1 prospect
in my opinion, he’s the guy we’ll miss more than Archer. I don’t think Archer holds up in the AL East and makes us regret him. I think he ends up going to the pen
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 1:37 PM CST up reply actions
I agree
I think Lee had the most potential value of anyone in our system. Not necessarily that he is the most likely to reach that value, but plus defenders at SS who can leadoff, walk, and steal lots of bases are relatively hard to come by. I think this is the hardest part of the deal for me.
but isn't this what we've gotton use to as Cub fans
''"I always thought I was the most competitive person out there. I never thought I'd find anybody more competitive until I met him.'' Ryan Dempster talking about Ted Lilly
by Madison Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 1:37 PM CST up reply actions
It's clear than anyone that knows the prospects involved well likes this deal for the Rays
I am not going to post Law’s comments on the prospects because they are pretty standard. His comments on Garza are actually fairly upbeat.
For the Cubs, it’s pretty clear the trade makes the team better. Garza isn’t an ace, but he has ace stuff, and taking him for the AL East — he’s notoriously been a Boston killer — and plugging him into the weaker NL Central should improve his numbers across the board. I’ve seen him hit 97 in the 7th inning, and seeing the NL-version of 8-9 hitters won’t lessen his chances to go deep into games. The Cubs rotation becomes really heavy on right-handed power stuff, and is better set to compete with the other starting staffs in the division, with the perpetual mystery of Carlos Zambrano always a huge piece of that equation. But at least now, any implosion from Big Z won’t completely compromise the season.
The other positive here is the chance for the Cubs to let young Andrew Cashner work out of the bullpen. If Cashner is in the pen, they could have a pretty unbelievable group of power arms, and could have a lot of six-inning games.
Cubs fans will enjoy what Garza can offer, but this came at a huge cost.
I am concerned about this move meaning Cashner goes to the pen.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 1:40 PM CST up reply actions
I don't get why KLaw loves Cashner in the pen so much
but it would only make things worse if after we traded our top SP prospect, we moved our next best SP prospect to the pen.
he just believes thats where he'll end up
he doesn’t believe he can be a starter and he’s assessing the deal from the standpoint of the cubs trying to improve for right now
in which case Cashner in the pen now, makes us better
but all of that is based on Klaw’s premise that Cashner cant hold up as a starter
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 1:43 PM CST up reply actions
I don't like it
Move Jay Jackson to the pen if you want a power righty. They already spent too much time developing Cashner as a starter to junk it now. If they weren’t going to give him a chance to be a MLB starter, he should never have been in the minors ala Chris Sale.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 1:45 PM CST up reply actions
i agree
i’m just telling you Law is viewing this deal from the perspective of the Cubs trying to compete right now, and the best bet for that to happen is to try to shorten the games considerably with those 4 pen arms
for our development as a franchise, i dont think its the right move
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 1:46 PM CST up reply actions
It seems to me
that Cashner needs another decent pitch to earn a starting role. Just like Shark, a FB alone doesn’t intimidate aaa ML baseball team over 9 innings. TR already has replaced Garza with a prospect rated much higher than Archer. That’s why many are suggesting Archer may turn into their closer in the future.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
The Royals wanted MLB ready players to fill open positions
None of the guys the Cubs gave up are MLB ready
"A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality." John Lennon
"My favorite food is Macaroni and Cheese, from the blue box." Geovany Soto
"They played like son of a guns......lord have mercy." Mike Quade
that is correct synopsis/repetition of
They got more for Garza than Kansas City did for Zack Greinke, although their package of players is, collectively, further away than what the Royals got. It looks to me like the Rays focused less on position and more on overall value.
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 2:03 PM CST up reply actions
And that's why the Rays are the Rays and the Royals are the Royals.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 2:04 PM CST up reply actions
and the Cubs are the Cubs....
forever chasing their tails without a real plan.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
?
Many think Archer could contribute in 2011… but won’t need to with the Rays.
And while neither Guyer or Chirinos is likely to be the missing link… they are basically ready to be what they are… a 4th OF and back-up C. Fuld is ready to be a 5th OF, if needed.
Really only Lee would have no realistic expectation of the bigs in 2011.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
lets take a look at this
Many think Archer could contribute in 2011
- many think and could in this sentence meaning he would have been, at best, a mid-season call up for the Cubs, but most likely a Sept callup
Guyer, Chirinos and Fuld have no real place on this team so they werent going to be in the bigs this year, barring major injuries, in which case the season was sunk anyway
I think losing Archer and Lee stings a bit but if Garza can improve the way Lilly did by switching divisions then HELL YES!
What?
All I was referring to was that these guys weren’t “that far away” outside of Lee.
I would say a possible/probably midseason call-up is not very far away.
Guyer and Fuld were certainly in contention for the last OF spot. One or both would be up for the inevitable Soriano injury.
Chirinos would’ve been an immediate upgrade on Koyie Hill, who the Cubs confusingly keep around.
I don’t think ANYONE questions whether the Cubs are a better team in 2011 with Garza than without. The question is how much better and at what price.
As for Garza’s improvement… that is wishful thinking which has been explained in numerous places.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
The Rays can be expected to use
Chirinos at catcher and perhaps Guyer as a 4th OF.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
MLB network radio loves this deal from the Cubs standpoint
They have had 2 so called prospect gurus on and both said they dont understand what Tampa Bay is doing and that Henry fleeced them. They call Archer nothing more than a possible #4 starter and then a bunch of back ups. They dont thing the SS is better then what they have now. Sorry to all the Henry bashers out there, but I think this is a great deal for the Cubs. They gave up an unproven prospect in Archer and nothing more. Guyer would never be a starter here and we have Castro, we still have BJaX and McNutt. I’m really pleased
WTF happened here?
Dan on a mobile
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 1:41 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Cant remember
Sorry, I’m listening while at work and just didnt here the names, but they were both in agreement. They thought Tampa should have gotten a legit top prospect and they didnt have Archer even in the top 50.
WTF happened here?
That's odd
I haven’t heard of one list that doesn’t have Archer in the top 50.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 1:43 PM CST up reply actions
I have a friend
I have a friend named Jim Henry. Whenever people call Hendry Henry I say WHY HATE ON MY FRIEND SO MUCH!
Formerly known as cubstoseriesby100. Thanks Al for letting me change my outdated screenname.
by puckishcubsfan on Jan 7, 2011 2:32 PM CST up reply actions
Jim Henry
Jim Henry is the guy that brought back Kerry Woods.
Formerly known as cubstoseriesby100. Thanks Al for letting me change my outdated screenname.
by puckishcubsfan on Jan 7, 2011 2:34 PM CST up reply actions
And they all play at Soldiers Field
and shop for groceries at the Jewels.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 2:39 PM CST up reply actions
Ya know, all prospects are unproven
That’s why they are ummm… prospects.
Regardless of whether you like the trade or not, Hendry did not “fleece” the Rays. The Rays had no more use for Garza and they extracted maximum value for him.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 1:51 PM CST up reply actions
I heard that on the way home
I think he was a reporter out of Chicago who nailed it on the head when he said that the smart baseball fans will be ok/love this trade while the passionate baseball fans will hate this trade.
I presume he considers himself
among the smart.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
I vote that from now on...
nobody is to use the name Jeff Samardzija, in any way, in reference of him being in competition for a starting spot…or ANY spot…from now on. Thank you. Let that ship sail.
New strategy for 2011:
"Let's wait for 2 or 3 more years to see if our prospects pan out".
I have always called him
“The Wideout”, here and elsewhere.
You may follow suit if you wish.
He's a Widette?
There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. Who says baseball isn't a religion?
As far as I can tell
Marcum and Garza are very similar.
In the AL East -
MARCUM: NYY, K-BB = 1.52, OBP=.383 OPS=.883
Red Sox, K-BB=2.50, OBP .296 OPS .770
Rays, K-BB=3.83, OBP=.275 OPS .607
GARZA: NYY,K-BB= 2.00, OBP .316 OPS .731
Red Sox, K-BB=1.92, OBP .309 OPS.716
TOR, K-BB 2.56, OBP .294 OPS .615
In HR allowed, BOTH are exactly at 86 in 5 seasons
That is like one Glendon Rusch year.
Just like he did with the Pierre trade
And the M***** B****** signing.
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 1:49 PM CST up reply actions
It is difficult to assess
someone overpaying when the players he traded (other than Fuld) have not played an inning in the Majors.
Wrong.
The Brewers got a cheaper deal based on the current value today.
Overpaying has nothing to do with what might happen. No one knows that.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
And Lowrie...
…will end up having much more value over his career than Archer. Power hitting middle infielders don’t come around often. There are 50 guys like Marcum in baseball today.
Proud recipient of a hot dog shot from the Iowa Cubs hot dog gun.
Does this trade potentially mean
the Cubs will be aggressive in the 2011 draft and pay over slot for players? This would help to boost the farm system.
If they were to pursue such a strategy, would that change anyone’s opinion of the trade?
Hey, it's a new century!
No...
because there’s no reason they couldn’t do both. And it doesn’t make sense that they’d diminish their farm system, make their major-league team more expensive and pump money into the draft at the same time. I’d like them to do this regularly, but it’s not the direction this team is going.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just North of Wrigley Field
by jameslcrockett on Jan 7, 2011 1:47 PM CST up reply actions
Why on earth would it mean that?
The Cubs just increased their payroll.
If Ricketts is to be believed, this means there’s less money available for the draft.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 1:47 PM CST up reply actions
I'm just asking the question.
I always wonder about information we don’t have and this questions popped into my mind when I was thinking about this trade.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Jan 7, 2011 1:55 PM CST up reply actions
I love this trade on several levels
First off, it’s nice to see Hendry actually sell high for a change rather than risk repeats of the Felix Pie or Corey patterson debacles.
My biggest fear going into this season was that the Cubs were going to go into a “holding pattern” while they waited for the big contracts to run out. It’s good to know that they’re going to at least try to keep pace with the Cards, Brewers and Reds.
By keep pace....
Do you mean safely and securely behind?
Because the Cubs have improved less over the off-season than the Brewers and were already far behind the Reds and Cardinals.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 1:53 PM CST up reply actions
If it gets the Cubs into the World Series this year, I'd be fine if the Cubs traded for THIS guy:
There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. Who says baseball isn't a religion?
Yeah...I hear he's a team leader, but, with old player skills now, tho.
New strategy for 2011:
"Let's wait for 2 or 3 more years to see if our prospects pan out".
Archer vs. McNutt
who has more promise?
"A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality." John Lennon
"My favorite food is Macaroni and Cheese, from the blue box." Geovany Soto
"They played like son of a guns......lord have mercy." Mike Quade
Depends who you asked... and I don't mean that as a snark.
Seems to be about 60/40 Archer.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
i'm in the mcnutt camp
fwiw
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:12 PM CST up reply actions
I understand
"A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality." John Lennon
"My favorite food is Macaroni and Cheese, from the blue box." Geovany Soto
"They played like son of a guns......lord have mercy." Mike Quade
The question now becomes
How much can we get for Silva, Wells, or Gorzelanny in a trade? If we could somehow use them to upgrade 2B and/or leadoff, I’d at least feel better about THIS season.
I'd
rather see them turn them into a good third base prospect.
DEJESUS!!!
Please call the Cubs directly
if you know of a team that will make that deal.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
Agreed, at least not until the deadline
when some team might be more willing to give up value for him. That is if he is effective.
One thing I would like to know
What did the Rays ask for and what did Hendry give them. If they asked for McNutt or Cashner, and Hendry did a self-evaluation and decided he liked those guys better than Archer, I would feel a bit better about the trade.
But, if the Cubs just paid the Rays price regardless of their feelings about the prospects involved, I’m still pissed.
Then you are not very good at evaluating trades
Why does it matter what the Rays wanted?
All that matters is who we gave up and who we got. Actually, all that really matters is the future value of who we gave up vs. the future value of who we got, which is impossible to know (and very difficult to predict right now).
That said, I’m happy with the trade. I’d be fine with the Cubs trading their top 5 prospects every year if it yielded some real major league value. Of the top 10 prospects in any given organization at any given moment, on average how many of them will have real value in the majors? 2, 3? The odds of success simply aren’t there, so I’m all for trading prospects at almost every opportunity.
I am shocked by that statement
I’d be fine with the Cubs trading their top 5 prospects every year if it yielded some real major league value.
You know it is hard to replenish the farm system through the draft. Prospects are often in the top 10 prospects list for multiple years at a time. You are basically stripmining the farm system every year. In a couple years your top 5 prospects will all be garbage and you will get nothing in return.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 3:00 PM CST up reply actions
You're right, of course
My point is that prospects, even top 5 prospects, are historically amazingly unreliable.
What percentage of the Cubs’ top 5 prospects over the last 10 years have become impact players (for any team) in the major leagues?
And are the Cubs really much worse than average in this department?
are you aware of the contradictions you're drawing?
in one post you say you’d trust the Cubs scouting over the Rays scouting, in another you comment on how few Cubs top 5 prospects have made an impact over the last 10 years (which by the way is a HUGE reason we haven’t been successful, probably the most significant reason)
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:05 PM CST up reply actions
It's not a contradiction
to say that one team (regardless of the quality of its scouts) is better at evaluating a player that it sees and coaches every day than is another team who has only seen a relatively sparse collection of stats, video and in-person data on the player.
it doesnt jive at all with the fact
that one organization is consistently producing mlb level talent from their minor league system and the other isnt
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:31 PM CST up reply actions
Honestly
I’m not sure which team you mean is consistently producing MLB level talent from their minor league system.
It’s hard to say that the current Cubs don’t have home-grown guys producing at the ML level. Soto, Colvin, Castro, Marshall, Marmol, Wells, to name a few.
Also, one could make an argument that of course the Rays use more home-grown guys because small market teams will almost always use more home-grown guys, out of necessity if nothing else.
if you're not sure
how about we just stack it up:
2010 lineups/rotations from home-grown:
Rays
Crawford
Upton
Zobrist
Jaso
Longoria
Garza
Price
Shields
NIemann
W. Davis
Cubs
Soto
Castro
Colvin
Wells
Zambrano
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:42 PM CST up reply actions
Zobrist and Garza weren't drafted by the Rays
And you left Theriot off the list ;) But it’s still not close.
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 3:44 PM CST up reply actions
thats true
Garza totally whiffed on he had mlb experience before
zobrist was acquired at the AA level, somewhat developed
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:46 PM CST up reply actions
Still not close?
That makes it 8-6 Rays. That’s close.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 7:27 PM CST up reply actions
In quantity...
not quality. Jeremy Hellickson should also be on that list.
"Playoffs?!" -Jim Mora
by Castro Por Presidente on Jan 7, 2011 7:30 PM CST up reply actions
opps sorry didnt see it was rotation
But still Andrew Cashner would be on the list as hes projected to be the 5th starter
we should have traded for Zobrist
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 7, 2011 3:44 PM CST up reply actions
This trade merely insures our iron-grip on 3rd place finish in 2011 is still intact.
Beyond that, nobody knows what 2012 is going to look like.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 7, 2011 2:07 PM CST reply actions
Which team are we finishing ahead of in 2011?
The Brewers, the Reds, or the Cardinals?
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 2:09 PM CST up reply actions
I'm praying that it's the Brewers....
but deep down I really know that I’m just kidding myself about finishing 3rd.
3rd place is my pennant in 2011.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 7, 2011 2:12 PM CST up reply actions
i'll preface this with
I don’t like this trade
I don’t think we’re a contender
let me make those points clear.
BUT we do have enough upside on the team to be able to contend IF EVERYTHING GOES RIGHT.
Now note… i didn’t feel this way at all last season. I just didn’t see how it could happen. This season there are scenarios where i could see us contending. So while last season i wrote off the year very very early and focused on development. This year i’m not expecting much, but there’s a scenario out there where we can contend and i’ll focus more of my emotional investment early in the season on the major league team than the minor leagues (partly because this trade significantly weakened our system and partly because Castro has graduated)
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 2:17 PM CST up reply actions
We might have been a contender in the NL Central in 2007
We actually might have a better team this year than in 2007. But the Central has gotten much, much tougher. Maybe that’s a good thing in that the Cubs will have to assemble a legitimate contender to win the Central now.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 3:09 PM CST up reply actions
not saying we're a contender now
saying the upside on the roster makes contention possible IF EVERYTHING BREAKS RIGHT
its me summoning the small bit of optimism i have.
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:12 PM CST up reply actions
I didn't think you were
I interpreted what you were saying to be that at least there is upside on this roster.
IF Pena hits like 2007, IF Garza has a break-out year, IF Colvin continues to improve, IF Castro continues to improve, IF Ramirez bounces back, IF Z pitches like he did at the end of last season, IF some of our young arms emerge….. Then perhaps the Cubs can contend.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 3:14 PM CST up reply actions
yes
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:16 PM CST up reply actions
Unfortunately
“IF EVERYTHING GOES RIGHT” now also has to include external factors like injuries and/or under performance from our competitors.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
i dont think so
i was talking strictly from a cubs perspective
if everything internally goes right, i could see a 90 win team, it would require:
a replacement level team is about 48 wins, so you need about 42 cumulative WAR to get to 90
here’s how it happens:
Aramis Ramirez – 4 WAR
Carlos Pena – 4 WAR
Geo Soto – 4 WAR
Ryan Dempster – 3.5 WAR
Carlos Zambrano – 3.0 WAR
Matt Garza – 3.0 WAR
Carlos Marmol – 2.0 WAR
Starlin Castro – 3 WAR (jump forward)
Randy Wells – 3 WAR
Marlon Byrd – 4 WAR last year seems unrealistic, lets give him 3 and call that optimistic
that’s 33.5 WAR from our core players, which means we’d need about 8.5 WAR from
Baker/Dewitt – about a 1.0 WAR combo
Fukudome/Colvin – maybe a 2.0 WAR combo?
Marshall /Wood – 2 between them would be great
that leaves 3.5 WAR from remaining pen/bench/5th starter… it would be tough to get there, but this is the case for everything going right….
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:28 PM CST up reply actions
I saw this
but that’s not just everything going right… that’s virtually everyone setting career highs. That’s more than just things “going right”.
I think of “going right” meaning Pena provides a ~.850 OPS. Would that even get him to 4 WAR?
Your list is a fully healthy and productive ARam, Pena’s 2nd best season ever (and best in 3 seasons), Soto matching his best, Dempster being 25% better than the last two years (pretty clear 08 was a fluke), Z holding his stuff together (and being a little better), Garza being solid (projection is fine here), a “down” year from Marmol (could bump him to 3, in this scenario I would think), Starlin essentially doubling his numbers, Wells staying solid, and 3 is fair but optimistic for Byrd.
The rest are fine with Dome/Colvin probably a little light. But it also doesn’t consider anyone having a negative WAR and assumes pristine health.
Again, it may not be “unreasonable”, but I consider that beyond just “everything going right”.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
take those one at a time
Pena hit 6.2 WAR in 2007, 4.0 WAR in 2008, 2.8 WAR in ‘09 and then fell off the cliff. just averaging those 3 seasons he’d be at 4.33 WAR. Is 4 an everything going right projection? YES. Is it unreasonable? Not really… he’s been in that ballpark 3 of the last 4 years
Geo WAR the last 3 years, 4.0, 1.3, 3.5, and note his 3.5 last yr was screwed over by so few PA’s. I think 4 is a realistic expectation for him this year
Dempster’s last 3 years avg WAR – 4.17
Marmol’s WAR last few years, 1.7, 1.3, 0.6, 3.0. If you’re willing to give me an extra WAR here but arguing over decimal places in the other context it would seem we’re pretty close, but the last few years are why i gave a 2 WAR projection
but yes it assumes pristine health (likely unreasonable for a roster filled with guys over 30
but yeah i think this is everything going right, i didn’t take everyone’s career year and throw it in there… i thought this was as realistic as an everything going right explanation could be
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:53 PM CST up reply actions
Mostly fair.
But with the majority of these players being older, you can’t really count on them all “bouncing back” to previous totals and averages.
Pena is in fairly clear decline. Bouncing back would be more like his 2.8 in ’09.
Geo is possible, but he has been injury prone, even if Quade uses better line-up placement for more ABs.
Dempster’s average is misleading. His 08 was off the charts. In only a math (not quality, since his 09 and 10 were fine), this would be like one of my students getting a 100 on an assignment and then a 70 on each of the next two… and concluding they really are a high B student (the average would be 80). Realistically, they did awesome work once… and then have been more fringy.
I bumped Marmol since last year was his first in the closer’s role. That certainly swings his WAR up.
But you are right. This could happen and despite my dismay over this trade… I sure as heck hope it does.
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
heres the thing
how many guys in our bullpen last year are negative WAR guys? Basically this trade made our bullpen a strong suit, complete 180 from last year
but if you notice
my extremely optimistic numbers ALREADY include no negatives, and we’re looking at fringe contention in a good scenario, contention in a best case scenario
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 7:13 PM CST up reply actions
Why the increased optimism?
I don’t see that.
Compared to last year, I feel better about SS and middle relief (though I was optimistic at this time a year ago about Guzman and Caridad).
I am less optimistic about 1B (Lee off 09 >> Pena off 10) and 3B (Ramirez really does seem to be aging fast).
Garza isn’t much different than Lilly so that is a wash.
So, in my mind, aside from some real changes in middle relief, this team looks pretty similar to where they were a year ago.
Eamus Ursuli!
upside from the system and young players now
Castro is already here, Jackson is close, the depth of the team is much much stronger
i kind of did the math on it above, it would take an injury-free season in which every player played to their capabilities and we had some serious upside surprise from the bench/bullpen but i could see it
i’m sure as hell not EXPECTING it, but there’s some mild hope
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:30 PM CST up reply actions
Glad to hear you are optimistic
I just can’t get there.
As I alluded to above, I saw a similar set of “if all the pieces fall into place” attitude last year. One major difference though is the improvements in Milwaukee and Cincinnati relative to my thoughts on them a year ago.
A year ago, I saw the Cubs as the #2 team in the division with quite a bit of ground to make up. I now see them as the #4 team with as much ground to make up on the three teams ahead of them. Not a good situation.
All that said, this does improve the Cubs for 2011 which I am happy about, even though I really don’t like this trade.
Eamus Ursuli!
Hopeful not Optimistic
sorry.
Eamus Ursuli!
i wouldn't say optimistic
i don’t really think that’s my take.
I see a chance this team can contend, its a relatively small one but it is a chance.
In addition, I don’t like the move made today and I think it weakens our chances in the future of being great (though enhances our chances of not being terrible).
I just think this team has some small chance that i didn’t see at all from the 2010 version, but most of that is simply the difference of having Castro here, having Soto prove 2009 was the outlier, and having Marshall become an elite setup man
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:36 PM CST up reply actions
It would seem that Hendry can't win no matter what he does...
He hires a manager and people b**ch. He does nothing and people b**ch. He makes a move and people b**ch. Can we at least let this one play out for the season and see what happens?
There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. Who says baseball isn't a religion?
They don't call it the "HOT STOVE" league for nothin'...
There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. Who says baseball isn't a religion?
HA! That made me laugh!
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Jan 7, 2011 2:47 PM CST up reply actions
Playoffs in 2003, 2007 and 2008.
I’ve seen worse (cough – College of Coaches – cough)
There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. Who says baseball isn't a religion?
I'll tell you whate he could do to make people happy
Not do dumb sh—-
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 3:01 PM CST up reply actions
Steep price
for a pitcher that’s never done better than a 4.00 FIP or xFIP in the majors. Here’s hoping he’s magical for the Cubs.
I’m not happy with the deal but since I like the Rays too I’ll have fun rooting for our minor league guys on that team.
2011 is looking better and better
by Castro Por Presidente on Jan 7, 2011 2:17 PM CST reply actions
Why is it a steep price?
What are the individual odds on any of the pieces the Cubs gave up becoming valuable major leaguers? It can’t be more than 40% for any of them individually?
And what is the ceiling in the case that they do make an impact in the big leagues? Is the ceiling really much higher than Matt Garza for any of them?
It doesn't matter.
The price based on current value today was steep. The Brewers added essentially the same pitcher who actually had a better 2010 for one top prospect. Keith Law is even saying this price was steeper than Greinke’s price.
True, none of these prospects may pan out and Garza may pitch better in 2011 than Marcum but based on what their perceived value is in January 2011, this was an expensive deal.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
But
Instead of comparing the deal to another deal with different teams and players, why not just compare the two sides of this deal? Isn’t that how you know if you got a good deal?
Hypothetical: You’re at Costco and you see a TV which you know is “worth” $1,000 on sale for $600. There’s only one available. You buy the TV and you’re thrilled with your deal. Then your buddy says that he go the same TV at Best Buy for $500 (similarly, only one available there). Now, your friend’s news may annoy you, but does it really change your perception re the deal you got on your TV?
I don't like the deal
because I think Lee could have been a key player up the middle for the Cubs for years. Not only for years, but for years when I think the Cubs will be in a better position to win a championship.
Ditto on Archer for the timing and longevity of him being price controlled. I never saw him pitch, but the scouts seemed to like him as a starter or out of the pen.
That to me is more valuable than Garza, who I see as a number 3 with number 2 upside.
2011 is looking better and better
by Castro Por Presidente on Jan 7, 2011 2:55 PM CST up reply actions
That's exactly what it does.
You’re giving a perfect analogy for a deal done in a vaccum.
by English Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 2:56 PM CST up reply actions
But where is the sign that says a #2/#3 is worth two top prospects?
Baseball is market driven. Hendry has never understood this which is why Miles gets a two year deal, Grabow gets $4.8 million and Bradley gets 3 years when no one else was going that high. Good GM’s assess the market and act within it.
The market was recently set with the Greinke and Marcum deals. Garza’s price was higher than that. Hendry always overpays.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
This is more along the lines of...
My buddy got a TV at Costco that was “worth” $1000 for $600.
So I got worried that all the TVs in the world were disappearing and paid $1100 for a TV that wasn’t as nice as my buddy’s, and pretty much like the 4 TVs I’ve already got, and gives up way too many HR.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 3:32 PM CST up reply actions
You really don't know much about prospects do you?
To you they are all fungible. Archer is no different than Jay Jackson is no different than Raphael Dolis than Sean Gallagher.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 3:02 PM CST up reply actions
That's exactly right
They are, by and large, eminently replaceable. You can’t seriously argue otherwise.
Obviously, this doesn’t apply to true “can’t miss” guys like Steven Strasburg. But what percentage of “can’t miss” prospects actually contribute in a real way to a big league team? Even that number can’t be higher than 60%. For pitchers it’s probably lower than that.
There has been some really good objective analysis of prospects lately
It even assigns a $ value to a particular Baseball America ranking. I don’t have time now, but I could google it later and post it here.
I may have thought the same as you as recently as 2 years ago, but given the economics of baseball today, you must have young cost-controlled players to compete.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 3:11 PM CST up reply actions
Interesting
That would be cool to see.
Though the Cubs do have a few young, cost-controlled players on their 2011 roster and starting lineup.
I don't see how anyone can say how horrible this is now...
I realize it has already been said but none of these players has seen the light of day on their new teams. garza seems to have a lot of upside now and we all know Hendry/Ricketts were hard pressed to do something after even the freakin Brewers did what they did this offseason.
Our prospects going hurts indeed but who knows what will come of them? Noo one does. Carlos Silva was supposed to be a complete pile of crap and he was all star considered for the first half (way more than any of us expected).
Why not just wait it out. Heck, before today, i thought the Cubs were a guaranteed 3rd maybe 4th place team. I can only say I feel better about 2011. If one of these prospects turns out to be the next Heyward then we can all commiserate in the coming years.
Kwa...Ki...Sur...Pee...Nee...Ku?
Garza could be the ace of our squad
The difference between an AL pitcher who faces a DH, and a NL pitcher who faces other pitchers is roughly 0.50 ERA. Garza’s career ERA of 3.97 is all in the AL. In the NL, I expect it to be around 3.50. This puts it on par with Z. Add in the NL hitters have never seen him, and it could be even better.
Now Z finished strong, so he’ll be giving Garza competition. But it should be a fun race.
by californiachicagoan on Jan 7, 2011 2:24 PM CST reply actions
So let's add in all the good stuff, but ignore the fact that he goes from a great pitcher's park to Wrigley.
And I’m pretty sure the Rays play good D, while the Cubs… well, the Cubs are the Cubs.
A high 3’s to low 4’s ERA sounds more likely. Is that a top of the rotation guy? Well, I guess it depends on the state of your rotation…
The glaring hole is your argument
is you provide no numbers. How much are you saying the D will effect ERA or WHIP? Do you have a basis for that? How much are you saying the park effects it?
by californiachicagoan on Jan 7, 2011 5:08 PM CST up reply actions
FIP and xFIP
Are meant to standardize pitchers’ ERA in a way to minimize how much it is affected by how good the D is behind him. Just for fun:
FIP:
Player 2007 2008 2009 2010
A 4.16 4.41 3.65 4.27
B 4.58 4.23 3.61 3.71
C 4.18 4.14 4.17 4.42
D 4.21 5.37 4.00 4.02
E 3.74 3.56 2.33 3.34
F 5.48 2.83 3.11 2.58
A: Ted Lilly
B: Zambrano
C: Garza
D: Carl Pavano
E: Greinke
F: Cliff Lee
2011 is looking better and better
by Castro Por Presidente on Jan 7, 2011 7:00 PM CST up reply actions
Your numbers illustrate
the impact that HRs surrendered have on pitcher evaluation. Garza has been one of the 6 highest FB% pitchers the past 3 years. In Wrigley can we expect to see ballhawk have a new BFF?
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
Great year ahead
The Cubs are a playoff caliber team, and a title contender. This team went 25-14 since its final construction late last year. They have now added a plus bat, a plus starter, and a plus reliever, without losing anything.
I’m looking forward to this year. The Bears are already in the playoffs, the Bulls will be an upper seed, ditto for the Blackhawks, and then the Cubs will win also. Good year for Chicago. Hope we get at least another championship out of it (Thanks Blackhawks for last year’s!)
by californiachicagoan on Jan 7, 2011 2:25 PM CST reply actions
The Cubs are a playoff caliber team?
Only if they move to the NFC West.
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 2:26 PM CST up reply actions
25-14
Yeah. A playoff caliber team.
by californiachicagoan on Jan 7, 2011 2:27 PM CST up reply actions
Royals went 3-0
from August 15-18th
PLAYOFFS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 2:29 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Playing well for less than 1/4 of the season makes you a playoff caliber team?
The 2009 Royals started the season 18-11. Were they a playoff caliber team?
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 2:30 PM CST up reply actions
This is not an arbitrary time period ...
… picked to help my point. This is the time period where we had traded away all of the players that are gone now, swapped to the coach we have now, and had acquired the players that we have now. Now, we have added Pena, Wood, and Garza on top of that without losing anyone. It is the only valid time period we have to project next year’s club.
by californiachicagoan on Jan 7, 2011 5:10 PM CST up reply actions
That's all true
But it remains to be seen whether they can sustain that pace over a full season, especially when they aren’t playing against a bunch of September call-ups. Even after this trade I still see a .500 team at best.
by Jody Jody Davis on Jan 7, 2011 5:15 PM CST up reply actions
I"m not sure I'm as rosy as you are
but ti’s a little nicer to hear at least SOME optimism, cockeyed as it might be.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 2:27 PM CST up reply actions
Better re-check you Blackhawks in the standings...just sayin'.
New strategy for 2011:
"Let's wait for 2 or 3 more years to see if our prospects pan out".
I completely agree...
Very good analysis. I think its a good trade, and could end up being a great trade if Garza ends up dominating the NL Central. I think the Cubs are much closer to being a contender today than they would have been by keeping Archer. Its fills a very big hole the team had. With the signings of Wood and Pena and now bringing Garza in, I think Hendry has done a pretty good job addressing the teams needs. Now go trade Gorzo, Fukudome and maybe one more and we could be well set up to contend in 11 and have the foundation for a great team in 2012. Go Cubs!
no matter where you go, there you are.
Very good p/u!
Garza is a very good p/u for the Cubs. For a good young major league arm it was going to be costly but if as it seems the Cubs wantto win now they’ve strengthened this yrs team with the addition of Garza and Wood too.
"Don’t belittle entire fanbases or neighborhoods…simply because they are within proximity to some people who don’t operate (or look) the same way you do." - AndrewJStone 6/29/2010
by DrCrawdad on Jan 7, 2011 2:31 PM CST via mobile reply actions
The Cubs may want to win now, but whether they are equipped to do so is a different matter.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 3:04 PM CST up reply actions
I don't know.
I do not keep up with what the other NL Central teams have done or not done. So I can’t speculate on whether the Cubs are better/worse than their divisional opponents. That said thought, this move and the Wood signing have improved the Cubs.
To amend a bit of what I said, this is not just a “win now” move. Garza is young and will be with the Cubs beyond this season, from what I understand. I am the wrong person to ask about the players the Cubs traded, I don’t know them or their value, but Garza should be helping the Cubs this year and beyond.
"Don’t belittle entire fanbases or neighborhoods…simply because they are within proximity to some people who don’t operate (or look) the same way you do." - AndrewJStone 6/29/2010
So you're saying this deal stinks?
Contributing Editor, SB Nation Chicago. Please follow us on Twitter!
Huh?
"Don’t belittle entire fanbases or neighborhoods…simply because they are within proximity to some people who don’t operate (or look) the same way you do." - AndrewJStone 6/29/2010
If we were going to give away our farm system.....
why didn’t we package all these guys for Adrian Gonzalez?
I don’t like the idea of retooling with this group. Garza or no Garza, the Cubs are not a contending team. Looking to 2012 would have been a better move—keep the prospects.
I'm sure we would have happily given this away for A-Gon.
Sadly, it takes two to tango.
by English Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 2:43 PM CST up reply actions
Yes.
I was among those most angered by Hendry’s failure (if you want to call it that) to land A-Gon. But there’s no guarantee — no real evidence, either — that these guys (or something similar) would have been enough for the Padres.
Agreed so Hendry thought he had to something
and this was the result. Garza isn’t a bad pitcher but this was an expensive price and I don’t think it pushed the Cubs to serious contention.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
'Give away our farm system'
I can’t believe you typed that with a straight face.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 2:53 PM CST up reply actions
Garza is good but
We were a third place team before the trade and a third place team after the trade. Why not build for the future?
This trade DOES build for the future
Garza is not a one-year rental. Why is that so hard for people to understand?
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 8, 2011 12:33 PM CST up reply actions
That's the intriguing part of this deal
For those of us (of which I’m one) that see 2011 as pretty much a tread-water season at best, the real crux of this deal is trying to figure out who would help the Cubs more in 2012 and 2013 – Archer or Garza. I tend to lean towards Garza.
What gives me pause though is that we gave up Lee in this deal as well. Not that I saw Lee as having a huge impact with the Cubs in 2012 and 2013, but once this team got better and it became clearer what our singular need was to really knock on (and kick in) the postseason door, I would have figured Lee to be key part of the deal needed to get that last piece.
So Archer (and pieces) for Garza? Good deal. Then next offseason Lee (and some better pieces) for a quality 2B? Leadoff hitter? 3B?. Then I’d be feeling real good about 2012 and 2013.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
I'm not sure
Lee is going to pan out. I think Archer is a better bet.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 8, 2011 1:47 PM CST up reply actions
But
I do like your thought process here, bh.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 8, 2011 2:02 PM CST up reply actions
Because people are dense.
"It's important in life to not give a shit. It can help you a lot." - George Carlin
Garza has 3 years to go and for him
we gave up 24 years of other players all of whom I suspect will make it to the MLB with varying degrees of success but with a very good chance of at least one of them being a major impact player. Garza is a win now move , not one for the long term.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 8, 2011 1:22 PM CST up reply actions
It does both, Jess,
and that’s what a big-market franchise should do. Build for the future AND try to win now.
Again: This isn’t Pittsburgh..
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 8, 2011 1:48 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
You are way too hung up on the big-market thing
It doesn’t matter what market you are in, the Cubs need to rebuild. Acquiring Garza wasn’t a rebuilding move.
by JSB on Jan 8, 2011 2:24 PM CST up reply actions
They don't need to do a rebuild like you're advocating
Big-market teams don’t do total rebuilds.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 8, 2011 5:07 PM CST up reply actions
If not alluded to above
FANGRAPHS Take:
Overall the Cubs gave up a solid package of prospects for a solid pitcher. It might have been a slight overpay, since the deal includes two top-five prospects and one really interesting 11-20 guy, but that’s the premium the Cubs have to pay in order to stay afloat in the NL Central.
Sweet deal IMO....
I love this deal! Pitching wins championships and we clearly needed another quality starter.To get a proven mlb starter with experience and give up “prospects” is no-brainer to me.Go Cubs!
The only hope I have for this deal working out is Maddux
Seriously. You have to assume he was involved in evaluating at least Garza & Archer. I sincerely don’ think Hendry does the deal if Maddux tells him Garza isn’t that good or Archer is the next David Price.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
I too hope Garza just busts out
the issue I have though, is that you buy low when someone is not performing up to their potential. We just paid for Garza’s perceived upside. Had we given up a package one would expect to give up for a career 3.97 ERA/4.26 FIP pitcher, and it turns out he’s a way better player than that, I would feel much better.
This thought had crossed my mind :D
Also, does Maddux have sons? ;)
by English Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 2:59 PM CST up reply actions
If Gammons' tweet is to be believed ...
another Maddux (Mike) was involved in efforts to land Garza. Hmmm.
Um I don't get those
How would Mike be involved in Garza to the Cubs or did he try to get him for the Rangers?
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 7, 2011 3:16 PM CST up reply actions
That makes me a little nervous
Mike and Greg are very close but they are hyper competitive. One can only hope
Madog did not let his desire to beat Mike at everything (including tiddlywinks according to Mike) effect his judgement.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 7, 2011 3:30 PM CST up reply actions
He has one son.
Why?
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 7, 2011 3:15 PM CST up reply actions
Never mind, it wasn't funny before.
It’ll be even less so if I explain it :P
by English Cub Fan on Jan 7, 2011 3:35 PM CST up reply actions
It's kind of funny.
The folks who were in the let’s rebuild/look to 2012 and beyond camp seem to hate this deal. The folks (Not Bruce, Al) who think the Cubs should compete every year and can compete this year are generally OK with it.
Which makes sense, I guess. A No. 2-3 starter is more important than prospects if you have a shot at the playoffs. If not, you double down on the future.
The worst thing is that Hendry knows he’s on a short leash. So his judgment on whether we should be rebuilding or trying to compete is, well, completely compromised.
The thing is, eg,
I think this is good for the Cubs now AND down the road. I don’t think it’s an either-or proposition.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:05 PM CST up reply actions
Then you must have a very low opinion of the prospects we sent to Tampa ...
or an inflated view of Garza.
Garza is entering what should be
the prime of his career. I think I’ll take that over the prospect of Archer being good in five years.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:09 PM CST up reply actions
And he might not be good at all.
I KNOW Garza is good, now and most likely later, too.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:14 PM CST up reply actions
Garza's effectiveness is not guaranteed.
He’s definitely a safer, sooner bet — there’s no question. Garza almost certainly will be a better player than Archer in 2011.
But that’s the point — a lot of posters believe Archer will be a better pitcher when the Cubs are in better shape to compete.
And I think
Garza will be good now and later.
I guess, to coin a phrase, time will tell.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:17 PM CST up reply actions
That's hyperbole, Bruce.
You can’t assume he would take five years to be good. Most experts disagree with you.
I still think the Cubs have plenty of "kids"
with plenty of upsides, eg.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:18 PM CST up reply actions
That's a decent point
We do still have Cashner, McNutt, Carpenter and J. Jackson in the minors. Depth was supposedly our organizational strength. But, Archer was thought by most to be the best of the bunch.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 3:20 PM CST up reply actions
Do you think Garza ...
will be as good as Archer, Lee, Guyer, Chirinos and (well) Fuld over the next several seasons?
Do you think that quintet
will be as good as Garza? I know what Garza can do. I don’t know what most of those others can do (except Fuld, of course).
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:24 PM CST up reply actions
Honestly, I'd be shocked if those four ...
aren’t more valuable between 2011-2016 than Garza. But Garza will be more valuable in 2011 and probably 2012. So, it’s a short-term kind of move.
Why only for two years, though?
He’s 27 years old. He could be more than effective into 2016, too.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:27 PM CST up reply actions
Garza could be effective for years, sure.
But as the years go by, the prospects the Cubs sent have a chance to play in the bigs.
That is a pretty accurate summation
Of who is in favor of the deal and who hates it.
I don’t hate it as much as I did 5 hours ago, but I still think it’s a mistake.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 3:06 PM CST up reply actions
I struggle to correctly assess minor leaguers I've never seen play.
And proclamations from many posters — folks like Josh77 or fsu are exceptions, IMO — are done without really knowing what they’re talking about. Said posters either assume that everything Hendry touches will turn to dust or are too enamored with homegrown talent.
It sure looks like the Cubs paid a lot for a guy who is a good but not great starter. I’m buoyed by the fact that Garza is young, relatively cheap and not guaranteed a contract, but the fact that he can even be mentioned in the same sentence as Randy Wells (or Steve Trachsel) … well, that’s troublesome.
Still, the worst thing about this is that we’re counting on Hendry (whose judgment is totally compromised by being on the hot seat) to decide whether to rebuild or reload and what moves to make to achieve either end.
That last part really is a head-scratcher, eg
Are you saying Hendry wouldn’t have made this deal if he weren’t on a “hot seat”? To me, this trade doesn’t reek of desperation.
If Hendry gets fired, weep not for him. I"m sure he’ll have another job in baseball pretty soon.
I think a lot of the Hendry-bashers are more afraid his moves might work. Then they’d be “stuck” with him.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:16 PM CST up reply actions
Are many Bears fans upset that Lovie had a great year?
Not that I can tell.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 3:19 PM CST up reply actions
You'd be surprised
I know quite a few who would rather see Lovie go than see the Bears win this year, because they don’t think he’s the right guy.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:21 PM CST up reply actions
They may have said that at the beginning of the season
But how many are complaining that the Bears have a home playoff game next week.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 3:21 PM CST up reply actions
No, they're still saying it now
and still happy the Bears are in the playoffs. That’s fans for you. :)
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:23 PM CST up reply actions
And unless they win it all...
…those same people who AREN’T complaining now, will call for his head when they’re defeated. It’s just how it goes.
"What's that? Ah -- Playoffs? Don't talk about -- playoffs?! You kidding me?! Playoffs?! I just hope we can win a game! Another game!" - Jim Mora
It's not a head-scratcher.
Our GM is the person who makes the decisions about whether to play for 2011 or to play for the future — and how to do so in the margins. By all measures, trading four prospects who aren’t ready yet but could be in a couple years for a surer bet in 2011 is NOT a decision to play for the future. The only way that makes sense is if Garza has more of a contribution over time for the Cubs than Archer AND Lee AND Guyer AND Chirinos.
And Hendry has personal reasons to play for now at the expense of the future.
And again, I think Garza
can do both.
As you said, Hendry is changing his strategy here and not hanging on to prospects too long. It’ll be interesting to see how it works out.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:22 PM CST up reply actions
I'm not on a ledge on this one.
And I like that Hendry apparently can learn new tricks in a theoretical kind of way.
That said, I’m not thrilled with this trade.
Someone (maybe a few others) alluded to this earlier
that we just won’t know for a while. The waiting is the hardest part, sadly.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:26 PM CST up reply actions
Bruce, I hate to say this ...
but your endorsement of the move would mean more if you didn’t almost ALWAYS support Hendry.
No offense.
Understood
But I really think Hendry’s hits have outweighed his misses, often significantly.
It’s not his fault guys and teams thatlooked like they couldn’t miss … did.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:29 PM CST up reply actions
Then where does the buck stop?
With all apologies to Harry Truman.
And that is where you lose me
3 years for Bradley is indefensible. $7.5 for Grabow? No one was going to be close to that for an average LH’er. The fact that he got hurt wasn’t Hendry’s fault but $4.8 in 2011 is dumb. Two years for Miles? Miles is one of those players who should have to fight for a job every year and Hendry gives him too years. He signs an injured outfielder last season and pays him like he is healthy.
To me, Hendry doesn’t under baseball is a market and you play it that way. Regardless if Garza pitches well, it was expensive.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
elgato....
… you make very good points here. Hendry can’t build for an undefined “future”. He has to produce major league improvement in the next two years or he is out of a job.
In this deal, he has done so while still keeping some of the better pieces of the system — Cashner, Jackson, McNutt.
We’ll see how it plays out, but Hendry kind of had to do this.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
That's not what I said.
It’s obviously done for BOTH reasons. You don’t think he tries to improve the team with each move? You think he does his job only for his own self-interest?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
I don't think he does his job period.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 7, 2011 4:22 PM CST up reply actions
No one thinks Hendry is intentionally sabotaging the team.
And no one (I don’t think) considers him lazy. But his back is against the wall now. It’s only human for him to be playing for the short term out of self-preservation.
Yes. This.
He won’t be able to sell the Ricketts on a few horrible years on the field while he rebuilds from the bottom up. So it’s either make these short-term ‘God I really hope this works and everyone turns it around this year…’ moves… or find a new job.
I’m not surprised with his choice.
There's one other factor in play, I think.
The Ricketts are feeding into Hendry’s short-term mindset because they have a lot of debt to pay off. Garza helps the Cubs to get to the fringe of contention in 2011, which means more tickets, more revenue, etc.
Hendry and the Ricketts can’t afford a rebuilding year. So they traded a good bit of the potential future for a good, not great, pitcher.
No, what they really can't afford is prolonged losing.
Setting nothing up for the future makes that seem more probable than I’d like it to be. Obviously, with the rebuilding plan that I favor, you’d have to accept a few years of losing teams… but the whole goal is to get things back on track in an affordable and effective way.
It’s not an easy decision, but that’s why being a GM is more difficult than just doing fantasy baseball trades all day.
My hope (and guarded prediction) ...
is that this trade won’t keep the Cubs from competing in 2013 and after.
I don't believe it will.
First, there are still several top prospects still in the organization. There are young players who started to establish themselves last year. And, plenty of $ is coming off the books over the next couple of years.
We could find ourselves in a very good position after 2011.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Well, I guess it depends on what you think are in the best interests of the team.
I think the wisest thing would be to stockpile young talent while big contracts come off the books to prep for a run in a few years. But that’s my opinion. I’d prefer to have a long-term plan that gets us to a championship caliber level. Hendry obviously makes his living putting wads of gum on leaky pipes and plastering over holes in the walls instead of knocking it down and starting over the right way.
Sigh.
Right.
You (and others) think the Cubs should stockpile young talent and (essentially) forsake 2011 because the Cubs are not realistically going to contend. So it makes sense that you hate the Garza trade.
Al (and others) thinks that the Cubs can contend in 2011, so a short-term move (forced because Hendry’s back is against the wall) doesn’t seem like a terrible decision.
Yep, pretty much.
I like the way ‘Duk phrased it in that Big League Stew post… the trade itself isn’t bad from a value standpoint, but from a timing point of view, it just doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.
I'm not happy about this move.
But I’m not irate because we do get Garza for two years after 2011 without giving him a long-term contract. That’s a definite plus.
If you think that the 2011 Cubs were one mid-rotation guy away, you shouldn't be the GM.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 4:59 PM CST up reply actions
He tries to improve the team IN THE SHORT TERM
I have no confidence at all that he has a long term plan. Which is the argument several dozen people have now made. There is little argument that this doesn’t make us better for 2011 (even if its only marginally) but he might have done some real damage to long term plans by trying to save his job.
"Oh Crap"
-Famous Last Words by General George Custer
If he'd done a better job as GM ...
he would have a longer leash and wouldn’t have to make moves to save his job.
No matter how many times you say this
It doesn’t make it wholly inaccurate and pretty damn stupid.
If his moves “worked” we’d be consistent winners. There isn’t a single Cubs fan who wouldn’t want that
"Oh Crap"
-Famous Last Words by General George Custer
Sure that's an issue
But, even if we have seen them once or twice we are still going to most likely be going off of what we read/hear from scouts and guys like Jim Callis, Kevin Goldstein or Keith Law and the numbers that we see
. I will say that in the last 6 months I have made a concerted effort to follow the minor leagues, and I already feel like I can start to have some independent opinions. Whether they are valid or not, is another question. For example, I really liked Archer and Carpenter better than most, while I thought that Lee was a bit overrated.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 3:18 PM CST up reply actions
JSB & elgato,
I’ve enjoyed reading each of your posts for the last hour. Thanks.
Dan
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Jan 7, 2011 4:15 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
I've always been a huge Garza fan
and like the deal but you gotta love Jessica coming to terms with it because Maddux most likely gave his blessing.
Dallas Green!
I had to find something positive
I will miss Fuld terribly but it is pretty similar to trading Maddux to the Dodgers in 06, it was to help Fuld who had very little chance of making the team as long as they could not trade Dome.
I had Garza on a fantasy team and he is a good pitcher, but not good enough for this deal.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 7, 2011 5:14 PM CST up reply actions
Fuld would seem to have a pretty good shot at making the Rays 25 man roster.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Yes he does
As I have mentioned I am pretty sure Hendry through him in after asking the Rays if they thought they could use him. He has always been very loyal to guys in the system for a long time who are not going to get a chance to play.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 7, 2011 10:26 PM CST up reply actions
This is like a "last train to paris" type of deal.
"That's life, that's what all the people say.
You're riding high in April,
Shot down in May
But I know I'm gonna change that tune,
When I'm back on top, back on top in June."
- Big boy Frankie
Is that like the Last Train to Clarksville?
There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. Who says baseball isn't a religion?
Not sure, but..."I'm A Believer".
"What's that? Ah -- Playoffs? Don't talk about -- playoffs?! You kidding me?! Playoffs?! I just hope we can win a game! Another game!" - Jim Mora
Well...
‘I wanna be free’ of the Cubs, but I’m a ‘daydream believer’, ‘Mary, Mary’…uh, I mean Ed.
They take ‘a little bit me, a little bit you’ out of us every year. ‘Sometime in the morning’ we may ‘look out. Here comes tomorrow’ watching through through our ‘shades of grey’ we’ll find our ‘pleasant valley. Sunday’, Monday, Tuesday- I don’t care what day…
All I know is ’I’m not your steppin’ stone’ any longer Cubbies!
Oh, what the heck. Sure I am. When’s Opening Day?
There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. Who says baseball isn't a religion?
Thinking happy, positive thoughts here
Here is John Sickel’s Rays Top 20 for this season. Maybe one of the guys a little way down the list is the mystery pitcher.
http://www.minorleagueball.com/2010/12/19/1886380/tampa-bay-rays-top-20-prospects-for-2011
Alex Cobb looks interesting. Shorter guy, but he put up some good K numbers this year.
I’d prefer a lefty, but the two promising lefties not named Moore on the list have only pitched in A ball.
This team can win the division.
"That's life, that's what all the people say.
You're riding high in April,
Shot down in May
But I know I'm gonna change that tune,
When I'm back on top, back on top in June."
- Big boy Frankie
by lexmarklover on Jan 7, 2011 3:17 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
heheheheh !!!!
HAVEN’T HEARD THAT ONE BEFORE!
"That's life, that's what all the people say.
You're riding high in April,
Shot down in May
But I know I'm gonna change that tune,
When I'm back on top, back on top in June."
- Big boy Frankie
Well, that about the level of cleverness
to which BV usually “ascends.”
I’m not penciling in the Cubs to win the division or anything else, but I would like to see a few games first.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 3:20 PM CST up reply actions
right, I'm not saying they will; i think this team has the talent to do so however.
"That's life, that's what all the people say.
You're riding high in April,
Shot down in May
But I know I'm gonna change that tune,
When I'm back on top, back on top in June."
- Big boy Frankie
and I'm saying they don't
They have the talent to compete for the 3rd or 4th spot in the standings
"Oh Crap"
-Famous Last Words by General George Custer
another gem thrown by BoVandy!!!!
"That's life, that's what all the people say.
You're riding high in April,
Shot down in May
But I know I'm gonna change that tune,
When I'm back on top, back on top in June."
- Big boy Frankie
Disagree.
They could compete.
But literally EVERYTHING must go write as well as misfortune for the three contending division opponents.
But I won’t write the season off. I’ll watch as many games as I can until the Cubs are out of it.
Guess I’ll start penciling in my vacation for late June…
"Stuff like this is why they should shut off the internet."
by Orval Overall on Dec 17, 2010 1:19 PM CST
Do you write alot?
"A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality." John Lennon
"My favorite food is Macaroni and Cheese, from the blue box." Geovany Soto
"They played like son of a guns......lord have mercy." Mike Quade
Right, we have to
wait until……..(Bruce continues moving date whenever it suits him) to decide that
"Oh Crap"
-Famous Last Words by General George Custer
by BoVandy on Jan 7, 2011 3:22 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
if you're gonna lolz, at least give me a lolzerkan .... jeez
"That's life, that's what all the people say.
You're riding high in April,
Shot down in May
But I know I'm gonna change that tune,
When I'm back on top, back on top in June."
- Big boy Frankie
I'm with ya Lex
They do have the potential to win it
"A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality." John Lennon
"My favorite food is Macaroni and Cheese, from the blue box." Geovany Soto
"They played like son of a guns......lord have mercy." Mike Quade
Absolutely.
This team has a lot of talent. In fact, I will be very disappointed if they dont at least compete, say be within 5 games.
by californiachicagoan on Jan 7, 2011 5:20 PM CST up reply actions
its in your best interest
to lower your expectations
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 6:52 PM CST up reply actions
Did you watch this team last year? Have you started using drugs recreationally since then?
It’s maybe a little improved, but not by much. For the most part, Carlos Pena=Derrek Lee, Matt Garza=Ted Lilly.
by mic on Jan 7, 2011 8:03 PM CST up reply actions
Chirinos and Guyer were not worthless
as some deal supporters are claiming. They were not top prospects ,but they had value and at a minimum could have been used as parts of other trades. It was not enough to give up 2 of our top 4 prospects, we had to give up 2 other useful players.
Fuld was thrown in to give him a chance to play so that does not count but I am tired of
people claiming Chirinos and Guyer were nothing. Even if neither had a spot on the Cubs
(and I think Guyer had a shot at 5th OF this year) they had value.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
I expect both will be on the 25 man roster
for TB this year. In fact, Chirinos may end in being the eventual starting catcher for the team. I really really wanted to see him replace Hill this year. Guyer could be a 4th or 5th OF. Archer ends up as a closer in time foe TB.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
teehee ^-^
"A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality." John Lennon
"My favorite food is Macaroni and Cheese, from the blue box." Geovany Soto
"They played like son of a guns......lord have mercy." Mike Quade
this is no teehee-ing matter
He's my Hossa
HO-HO-HO-HO-HOSSA
by jesus christos on Jan 7, 2011 4:02 PM CST up reply actions
Oh....argargarg! *Pirate laugh
"A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality." John Lennon
"My favorite food is Macaroni and Cheese, from the blue box." Geovany Soto
"They played like son of a guns......lord have mercy." Mike Quade
i feel that a harrumph is more appropriate
but i could see how a pirate laugh works
He's my Hossa
HO-HO-HO-HO-HOSSA
by jesus christos on Jan 7, 2011 4:10 PM CST up reply actions
Fernando Perez went to Columbia ... impressive
and yes calm down, i know where Fuld went.
"That's life, that's what all the people say.
You're riding high in April,
Shot down in May
But I know I'm gonna change that tune,
When I'm back on top, back on top in June."
- Big boy Frankie
Well it makes Perez an actual Ivy Leaguer
Today’s trivia question. Who was the last Cub to be a graduate of an Ivy League school.
The answer is not as obvious as you think.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 7, 2011 3:41 PM CST up reply actions
mark derosa
then mike remilinger i believe
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:43 PM CST up reply actions
DeRosa never graduated
but you are right it is Remlinger. I thought most people would guess Glanville but
Remlinger was more recent. However given your "name’ I should have realized you would
recognize a fellow Dartmouth grad.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 7, 2011 3:45 PM CST up reply actions
fellow fraternity brother too
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:47 PM CST up reply actions
PS. I am guessing the Garza trade means they have no interest in Chris Young
or we could add another Ivy Leaguer.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 7, 2011 3:48 PM CST up reply actions
Who cares?
I know plenty of Ivy Leaguers who are legacy meatheads.
by SouthWabashSoul on Jan 7, 2011 4:35 PM CST up reply actions
I sincerely doubt any major league players who graduated from an Ive League
school were legacy students and probably not meatheads either. It takes a pretty serious academic committment for someone who will try to become a profesional athlete to graduate at all, let alone from a top school.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 7, 2011 5:43 PM CST up reply actions
You can say that again.
Not an easy day to run BCB
There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. Who says baseball isn't a religion?
The Cubs just got better. OFF WITH HENDRY'S HEAD!!!!
"It's important in life to not give a shit. It can help you a lot." - George Carlin
by bluemagic9 on Jan 7, 2011 4:11 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
And what sparked this?
Trading prospects for a good pitcher. Thats what has this forum in an uproar.
by californiachicagoan on Jan 7, 2011 5:21 PM CST up reply actions
Well, many in this forum. Not all.
There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. Who says baseball isn't a religion?
they got better in a year they won't compete
and gave away too much to do it! HOORAY!!!!
"Oh Crap"
-Famous Last Words by General George Custer
Over-Under Section
Plate Appearances for career in MLB
Guyer 578
Chirinos 843
Lee 2017
Fuld (2011 going forward) 575
IP in MLB career
Archer 1547
(Numbers pulled out of my backside for debating purposes)
i'd go under on archer every day of the week
then again i’d do that on any pitching prospect
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 3:34 PM CST up reply actions
What, no over-under for the number of BCB posts today?
There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. Who says baseball isn't a religion?
Infinity +1
There are 108 beads in a Catholic rosary and there are 108 stitches in a baseball. Who says baseball isn't a religion?
Over on Guyer and Chirinos
Under on Lee, way under on Fuld
I’d take the under on Archer, just because of pitcher injuries, not because I think he’ll only be a reliever.
No one should be untouchable on this roster unless his name is Eliot Ness...or Starlin Castro.
it's basically irrelevant
over a small sample size like this, a pitcher will have large fluctuations from his mean (true talent level). as i mentioned before, the expected ERA adjustment for an AL to NL move is about 0.4 ERA points.
Garza vs the NL (w/o DH) ?
Remember that the Rays home games against the NL would still have DHs.
by californiachicagoan on Jan 7, 2011 5:23 PM CST up reply actions
and DHs
would be the micah hoffpauir’s of the world, NL teams best PH
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 6:55 PM CST up reply actions
Ok deal, not great, but ok.
Cubs fans, our offseason trade rumor frenzies have finally fostered a trade! I see this as an ok deal for both sides.
Chris Archer: Very good prospect with #2 potential; however, I see him as a Garza type potential in a general sense. He has 2-3 plus pitches with iffy control, could be more suited for the bullpen, which is what I think the Cubs view him as.
Hak-Ju Lee: Lee, conservatively, could be an Alex Gonzalez with less power and more speed. He is an amazing fielder and has great speed right now. His baserunning skills need work, and his skills at the plate definitely need work as well. He looks like he could be a successful MLB player, but having Castro lessens the blow here.
Brandon Guyer: He should be a 4th/5th outfielder type. Good ballplayer, but no big loss.
Robinson Chirinos: Another good backup. Could have potentially been a super utility type, but I wouldn’t be too comfortable with my backup catcher playing shortstop.
Sam Fuld: Basically equal to Fernando Perez.
Matt Garza: Garza looks to be a #2-3 starter, depending on his transition to the NL. The AL East is a rough division to pitch in and he did pitch in a pitcher’s park with a stellar defensive team. Sounds bad to start. Garza comes with 3 years of team control at the age of 27 and he is just hitting his peak years. His 3.97 ERA, 1.32 WHIP, and 4.45 xFIP over his career look slightly worse than Carlos Zambrano (3.50, 1.31, 4.13). His high FB rate does concern me, but Ted Lilly made it work very well here and I could see Garza duplicating that because, well, he does have better stuff than Ted.
Chicago Blackhawks 2010 Stanley Cup Champions
Duke Blue Devils 2010 NCAA Men's Basketball Champions
Gentlemen, relax. Enjoy the moment. You got a good young pitcher. Some of you are acting like this move has cost the Cubs a World Series appearance. FYI, the Cubs World Series appearance will happen shortly after Health Care Reform and the Rapture. So if Garza helps you enjoy a few more days in the sun, what’s the harm? Maybe Archer will turn out to be better than Garza, but who among us really knows? If you believe that Castro is the real deal, why is the loss of Lee a problem? What I’ve seen of Lee says UT. Great fielder, great pinch-runner. Terrible hitter. Think back to our old friend Cesar Izturis. Lee’s a clone. Guyer’s the player who might make you reconsider this deal, not Lee. Guyer’s a hitter, but not a player. In the AL could be a great DH, but at Wrigley, he’s a pinch-hitter.
PS Wish the Cubs had kept Ted Lilly. No reason to move him.
Guyer
Is not anything close to a DH…he doesn’t have the bat and from most reports is a pretty decent CFer. And no, this move doesn’t cost the Cubs a world series, but it definitely is not a step in the right direction.
by SenorYuletide on Jan 7, 2011 4:08 PM CST up reply actions
I agree with Stagg!
I feel the Cubs are def.a better team for adding Garza!i Time will tell if the prospects ever become more than just that!
I just read all 2000 comments (or whatever) from my damn iPhone before commenting.
I don’t get it. I don’t see a plan. I don’t an end goal. I don’t know what we’re trying to do. We sign old guys (Wood), we have really young guys (Castro, Colvin), we trade all our top prospects for somebody we essentially had last year (Lilly). Our payroll is basically choked until the 2012. The owner’s concerned more with trying to get $200,000,000 from the public than anything else.
I’m just exhausted. It’s exhausting following this team. There’s no direction, no purpose, just the treading of water. I thought we were getting young, but today we gave a lot of that away. The Reds and Brewers are now teams I envy! And as long as the Cardinals have Pujols and TLR, they’ll compete.
I think it’s time to move on from Jim Hendry. I value and appreciate what he’s done for us. Some of my favorite players to wear a Cubs uniform have been thanks to him. But if this club is going to compete any time soon WR may just need a total management wipe. It’s hard to trust him, harder to know what he’s trying to build here.
Dan
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Jan 7, 2011 4:10 PM CST via mobile reply actions 7 recs
*see an end goal
*we may just need
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Jan 7, 2011 4:12 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
I read some of the comments here
and I feel like I’m in “Through The Looking-Glass.”
Like someone earlier posted, the Cubs could get Wellington Castillo for Albert Pujols and the chorus of bitching would be deafening.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 4:16 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
"Through The Looking Glass" is possibly the best episode of LOST.
OK, I’ll stop threadjacking. That name just reminds me of that episode.
That the one Charlie died in?
"What's that? Ah -- Playoffs? Don't talk about -- playoffs?! You kidding me?! Playoffs?! I just hope we can win a game! Another game!" - Jim Mora
Yes. I was going to avoid spoilers for any who haven't seen it, but that's the episode.
Charlie making his ‘Greatest Hits’ and the ‘NOT PENNY’S BOAT’ were just amazing moments.
I’m in the middle of season 2 on my re-watch right now. I love this show.
Yeah...a very good episode of an amazing TV show...
got the entire series box set for X-mas and will start my re-watch soon.
"What's that? Ah -- Playoffs? Don't talk about -- playoffs?! You kidding me?! Playoffs?! I just hope we can win a game! Another game!" - Jim Mora
Bullshit!
Walkabout and The Constant—both waaaaaaay better episodes.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
The Constant
Best episode of TV ever. But then Desmond is my favorite character on TV since Kramer.
"We love them, We mourn for them, Unlucky boys of Red" - Morrissey
"Giggs gets past Viera, past Dixon, who comes back at him, it's a wonderful run from GIGGS!!!" - Martin Tyler
Nucks Misconduct's Prodigal Son, Chief Curmudgeon, Chief Hunk, Chief Charmer and Chief Drama Queen.
"I think about it still, almost every day," Joyce says. "I don't want to be known as Jim Joyce, the guy that blew the perfect game. But I think that's inevitable." Why? "Because I'm Jim Joyce," he says, "the umpire who blew the perfect game."
by Section 312 on Jan 8, 2011 2:16 AM CST up reply actions
But you're right, the Desmond & Penny love story was my favorite part of LOST, outside of John Locke.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
as soon as i heard about this deal i knew that someone would say that people would bitch about trading pujols for beans
He's my Hossa
HO-HO-HO-HO-HOSSA
by jesus christos on Jan 7, 2011 4:18 PM CST up reply actions
It's more like "The Wizard of Oz" for all the straw-men you're throwing around.
It’s like a compulsion with you!
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 4:27 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
You're so negative.
I can’t believe you don’t like this deal. Take your pitchfork somewhere else! Can Hendry ever do anything right? Why are you a Cubs fan? I heard the Royals are looking for new fans. This is a GREAT move. Garza had a FIP in the 4‘s! He won 15 games! That’s 2 more than Felix Hernandez. Therefore, Garza>Felix! He’s worth at least 12 wins this year, book it.
Did I miss anything?
Ah sarcasm
when your arguments arent changing minds, just make fun of people.
by californiachicagoan on Jan 7, 2011 5:38 PM CST up reply actions
I am with you Dan
I guess Ricketts concept of “Being like the Red Sox” took a detour today.
The plan is no plan.
The Lack of a Plan is the Biggest Problem
That was the most disheartening thing to me. For the first time since Grace and Dunston were in the minors, it looked like the Cubs had an actual plan, maybe you could say the Prior-Wood era was a plan too.
It seemed like the clear plan for 2011 was to take a shot with low-risk, high-reward vets like Pena and Wood and to let the prospects grow. Now this deal just makes it look like our ownership was being cheap by signing those guys. Not that there was ever a plan in place.
If you could assure me that the Cubs made this trade because they think Archer is overvalued and that Lee will never hit, then I would feel much better. But, I really get the feeling that this trade was made because they are desperate to get 30,000 in the seats in April.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 4:42 PM CST up reply actions
Yes to this, Dan.
The Cubs should have a two or three year plan that brings in young talent as these horrid contracts expire. If all goes well, and admittedly, with pitchers that’s definitely an if, Archer should be starting some productive years just as Garza’s contract is ending. We’d know a lot more about Lee and Guyer by then as well.
You can’t build for the future and at the same time have a GM trying to save his ass now. If the Cubs had won 85 or 86 games last year this might make sense. But I’m afraid this is more of the same: Keep the team good enough that the fans don’t go into complete revolt and stop showing up but never really have the balls or brains to stick with an actual well thought out plan that might mean an actual complete crap year or two.
We just added....
a very good starting pitcher! What is there to moan about?Nice move by Hendry!He isn’t done dealing yet!Go CUBS!!
I'm going to repeat what I said in the other thread.
Garza is a proven pitcher that just came off his best season in the toughest division. He is a pitcher with World Series experience, something that 98% of Cubs players on the current roster don’t have. Archer was good, yes, but how do we know he was going to be good in the majors? Garza is 27 as well. Got another young arm for the rotation. As for Lee, he’s got that guy named Starlin Castro ahead of him, who is probably (at the rate he is going) going to be the shortstop for the Cubs for the next 15 years.
Good deal for the Cubs, good deal for Hendry. The Cubs have gotten nothing but better this offseason.
Keep that Q Train rollin' in '11. Let's win it for Ronnie.
One more thing about Garza...
dude threw a no-hitter last year, and has as many postseason wins as the rest of the Cubs pitching staff combined (he and Kerry each have 2).
Keep that Q Train rollin' in '11. Let's win it for Ronnie.
The only pitching Garza will be doing in October is on Wii Baseball in his living room.
I don’t get this fascination with the postseason experience. Ya still gotta get there first. That’s a tall order this year. And probably the year after that.
Let's say they do make it this year
would you rather throw someone like Wells or Silva out there or a guy like Garza, who has been there before?
Keep that Q Train rollin' in '11. Let's win it for Ronnie.
Do you know how many recent Cubs had Series experience?
Let’s just say “a lot.” Marquis. Mabry. The 2003 Marlins, who were, of course, later acquired en masse. Soriano has played in 2 Series, and has stunk in the playoffs like it’s his job. Edmonds. Floyd. Jeff Baker.
Being on a WS-losing team doesn’t mean you’re going to get back to the Series, or excel there if you do.
Neifi Perez made a Series.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 4:42 PM CST up reply actions
I'm just not sure how much I buy this 'he's been there before' thing.
Ted Lilly had ‘been there before’… and last I checked, they’re still trying to dig his glove out of the Arizona mound.
I don’ t think experience can really hurt you (unless all of your prior experience is bad, in which case maybe you should look elsewhere when making your postseason roster), but I do wonder how much it can really help. Most of these guys are professional enough that even if they have butterflies before the game, once they get out there, they’re focused and just playing baseball. Otherwise, they shouldn’t be in that moment I’d think.
That guy Lincecum sure missed having post-season experience this year
I don’t want Silva out there because he sucks. Wells is a bit better, but the point stands.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 4:44 PM CST up reply actions
Well now we have a guy that the Cubs can go to instead of Silva and Wells
Keep that Q Train rollin' in '11. Let's win it for Ronnie.
Ok, assuming the Cubs make the playoffs.
Which they won’t.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 4:49 PM CST up reply actions
Don't see why they can't
It’s not even Spring Training and everyone is thinking this season ’s a lost cause.
Keep that Q Train rollin' in '11. Let's win it for Ronnie.
by mikegncb34 on Jan 7, 2011 4:50 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
The point is that it's not like we are getting nothing out of this deal.
Proven pitcher coming off his best season. He’ll be fine
Keep that Q Train rollin' in '11. Let's win it for Ronnie.
Then what is Archer, the second coming?
Sure he had a great season in the minor leagues, but it’s still the minor leagues.
Keep that Q Train rollin' in '11. Let's win it for Ronnie.
Lee has to get by Castro, I don't see that happening any time soon.
Fuld will never be more than a 5th outfielder with the Cubs, Chirinos is a backup catcher
Keep that Q Train rollin' in '11. Let's win it for Ronnie.
Or Castro could move to second if/when Lee got the call.
The jury’s still out on whether or not he can stick at short. He for sure gets the benefit of the doubt for his age, and he’s made some beautiful plays, but the errors are killers.
Agree about the errors.
But the kid is 20. I feel like he will adjust.
As for Lee, why is everyone so sure he’s the next big deal? Starlin is a much better hitter than he is anyways
Keep that Q Train rollin' in '11. Let's win it for Ronnie.
lees defensive tools are better than castros already good ones
and he would fill the role of an actual lead off hitter
He's my Hossa
HO-HO-HO-HO-HOSSA
by jesus christos on Jan 7, 2011 4:49 PM CST up reply actions
But he is an extra player
so many people don’t see a problem with giving him away cheaply.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
Not "extra" for a team that has literally no plus 2B in the system.
Castro or Lee could have moved over.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 5:01 PM CST up reply actions
The point is Archer and Lee are too much for a #2/#3
Just because the Cubs have lots of minor leaguers doesn’t mean we should start overpaying.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
It worked so well when we had lots of dollars
Oh, wait, now we have no dollars. Soon we will have no prospects either.
Dollars to donuts this isn’t the last prospect we wave bye-bye to this season.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 4:53 PM CST up reply actions
Occasionally ...
players can switch positions. It might make sense to move Castro (if he gets bigger) to third down the line. That would leave the Cubs without a shortstop.
I don’t think anyone is crying over the loss of Sam Fuld, or Chirinos, for that matter. But Guyer has some upside.
obviously the cubs should acquire AJ burnett as well
He's my Hossa
HO-HO-HO-HO-HOSSA
by jesus christos on Jan 7, 2011 4:35 PM CST up reply actions
get me BUD SMITH
now!
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 4:36 PM CST up reply actions
A few more things about Garza
He gave up 28 HR last year.
His K/9 dropped almost 2 last year.
He’s -10 vs teams over .500
He’s ranked 6th highest among pitchers in FB%.
If a quality pitching start is 3 runs and 6 innings, then a quality hitting day is 1 for 4.
Proven pitcher?
Maybe. He’s proven to be fairly consistent, which is good. A guy that posts sub 4 ERA for 3 years in a tough division with a lot of good hitting teams. If you believe in the NL rule you’d hope he can get his ERA down to mid 3’s playing in our division and cut down on the 28 home runs he allowed last year.
That said, if you look at his pitching profile it doesn’t look that different from a Randy Wolf and guys like that, and for that reason it feels like the Cubs gave up a lot, a trade made as if the Cubs HAD TO make a move – which of course they didn’t. 2011 is not going to be a year of contending, so there should have been no pressure to overpay in prospects other than to try and keep pace with division rivals and stay semi-competitive.
Guyer actually lives near me here and randomly enough buddy of mine ended up talking to him for a while earlier this week at the gym – seemed excited to be part of Cubs organization but of course no doubt understands the biz of the biz.
by BeltwayCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 4:33 PM CST up reply actions
We've had WS experience out the yang, and what's that get us?
How many 2003 Marlins did we wind up acquiring? Pierre, Lee, Hollandsworth… also Edmonds, Soriano… hell, Cliff Floyd had WS experience. Jason Marquis had WS experience. John Mabry had WS experience. Neifi Perez now has WS experience.
It doesn’t mean a thing.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 4:37 PM CST up reply actions
Well.
Then maybe they are just a hopeless cause and we should all just give up.
If in June Garza sucks, then I’ll print out all of my comments and eat them. But for right now, I’m giving this thing a chance.
Keep that Q Train rollin' in '11. Let's win it for Ronnie.
Yeah. That's what I'm saying.
Try this on:
If “he one time pitched in the Series” was a factor in acquiring Garza (or any of these other guys) then Hendry is a moron.
The Cubs were doing things the right way, building up a base of prospects. Then, they got distracted and acquired another #2 starter.
I don’t know why this team aspires to 87-win seasons, but they’re the BEST at targeting and acquiring slightly-above-average players.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
by D98 on Jan 7, 2011 4:44 PM CST up reply actions
I’ve never understood the ‘playoff experience’ argument.
"The riches of the game are in the thrills, not the money." --Ernie Banks
by dtpollitt on Jan 7, 2011 4:47 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
Because it's stupid
I am 100% confident there is zero correlation to post-season experience and post-season performance. Just look at the SF Giants this season. Their entire pitching staff was post-season virgins.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 4:50 PM CST up reply actions
I admit
I don’t know much about the Cubs prospects but on the surface I think this is a good deal. Milwaukee’s pitching got better. I like the way Fuld plays the game, but he is never going to better than a fourth outfielder and was a luxury. He might have been let go anyway considering rostergate. I don’t know enough about Archer to judge, but we got some other prospects back.
Al mentions Pie and Hall, Fox comes to mind too. Other than Palmerio have the Cubs every really traded away a star as a prospect? We brought up our best prospects last year so nothing wrong with trading to improve I think this years squad under Quade will be way better than last years group was.
I thought JH was the biggest bozo in sports when he signed Milton Bradley to a 3 year deal, he became my personal hero when he found a taker. Now if only he can include Samardzija in one of these packages, I would be ecstatic.
I think we got better today, and like all of the off season moves, something I couldn’t say a year ago.
13- Warner, 23- Sandberg, 40- Tillman, 11- Walter
"Now if only he can include Samardzija in one of these packages, I would be ecstatic."
YES. Me too.
Keep that Q Train rollin' in '11. Let's win it for Ronnie.
We didn't get other prospects back
We got Tampa’s trash back.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 4:45 PM CST up reply actions
Is that confirmed?
Do we know who the pitcher is?
The outfielder is trash
The only thing I have heard about the pitcher is that we are sure it’s not Matt Moore. I will eat my shirt if it is a significant piece.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 4:48 PM CST up reply actions
It absolutely amazes me that people continue to celebrate Hendry
trading an overpaid player who couldn’t possibly match his stats to his contract (Bradley) for another (Silva)
How was that remotely heroic? ONLY because Silva isn’t as big an ass?
"Oh Crap"
-Famous Last Words by General George Custer
he got seattle to toss in $9mill
He's my Hossa
HO-HO-HO-HO-HOSSA
by jesus christos on Jan 7, 2011 5:01 PM CST up reply actions
I assume you mean in the personal sense
because Silva is bigger in the physical sense. Sorry I couldn’t resist after reading that line.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
I give up.
People just don’t understand the concept of prospect values and maximizing that value. Hendry overspent like he always does.
If prospects usually fail then let’s trade Brett Jackson for a 5th outfielder. That would make the Cubs better in 2011.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
Don't give up!
Sounds like you have at least a couple non sequiturs that you could post.
Thanks for the big words
Keep up the faith in Hendry. He’ll get it right eventually.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
Um, Garza makes the Cubs better
in 2012 and 2013, too. And possibly beyond.
If this was a one-year rental, I wouldn’t like it.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 5:26 PM CST up reply actions
Or he might have a season ending injury
And if it’s one that impacts his career, we’re stuck with the bill.
RIP Ronnie James Dio (July 10, 1942 - May 16, 2010) and Ron Santo (February 25, 1940-December 2, 2010).
Archer might have one, too
Oh, well.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 6:45 PM CST up reply actions
31 comments
on the SB Nation Rays page We have over 600 on the overflow thread
13- Warner, 23- Sandberg, 40- Tillman, 11- Walter
So here it is straight from a baseball expert
So here’s olney talking about the trade and referencing other baseball insiders and what they think about the trade and the cubs chances for 2011
"We'd better overpay to get Garza now."
Olney paraphrasing the Cubs.
Seriously?
The comments from Hendry today are worse than the trade itself.
Jim Hendry: “Matt Garza is a top 10 in baseball pitcher. We like Matt Garza more than Zack Greinke.”
So dumb.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 4:52 PM CST up reply actions
what top 10 baseball pitcher catagory is Hendry referring to?
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 7, 2011 4:54 PM CST up reply actions
I still haven't figured that out
Perhaps top 10 baseball pitchers with facial hair?
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 4:55 PM CST up reply actions
The one who have a
G and a Z in their last name. Duh!
big nosed pitcher category?
He's my Hossa
HO-HO-HO-HO-HOSSA
by jesus christos on Jan 7, 2011 4:56 PM CST up reply actions
Let me clarify that.
Olney wasn’t directly quoting or precisely paraphrasing any individual. He was saying the Cubs ‘figured we better overpay to get Garza now.’
It makes sense if you watch it.
That doesn't make any sense
Why was there urgency to acquire Garza?
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 4:56 PM CST up reply actions
the only logic I can see in that is that they think:
1: He is going to blossom into an even better pitcher than he is now.
2: They think he might give some sort of hometown discount OR they can extend him before he ever hits free agency market if they’ve had him with the club a few years.
"Oh Crap"
-Famous Last Words by General George Custer
Because chances are he won't be around by the all star break
and they would be competing against several other clubs which would drive the price even higher
They had better be right about him
Hendry’s ass is on the line here.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 5:04 PM CST up reply actions
Olney also referenced in his interview
That there weren’t any other viable options to upgrade the roster, so yes this was a case where you were going to pay…Bruce Levine says Archer probably won’t crack the Ray’s rotation till 2012 at the earliest
not to mention...
that having Garza will make it easier to trade Dempster to a contending team by the break.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 7, 2011 5:04 PM CST up reply actions
See this is where I see different....
Now I don’t have stats and all that, but if you look at the cubs under pinella and under quade you see two totally different teams…..I really think that under quade your going to see a lot of improvement from players and that is going to translate into a better record and chance to contend….this team quit on pinella and he quit on them, so I don’t think it’s totally accurate to base next year on last years results
so did Derrek Lee.
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 7, 2011 5:09 PM CST up reply actions
He also mentioned
that if zambrano pitches to form, this could give the cubs a good 3 pitcher rotation of zambrano garza and demspter and that they could do well in the central this year…
here’s another:
http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/2984/steep-price-worth-it-for-garza
Could do well....
As in they are firmly behind the Reds, Cardinals, and Brewers.
by JSB on Jan 7, 2011 4:56 PM CST up reply actions
and if a frog had wings...
As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.
by santoswoodenlegs on Jan 7, 2011 4:56 PM CST up reply actions
Nobody wants to hear that
It’s all-doom, all-gloom all the time here at WBCB.
by Not Bruce Froemming on Jan 7, 2011 5:25 PM CST up reply actions
Thats right! This place needs to perk up!
another amazing move by Hendry! The Rays were just snookered!
Me and NOT BRuce will love watching the Cubs victory parade together in Chicago!
The cubs are betting on
big improvement from Garza. Everyone keeps refrencing his WAR and peripherials but you have to remember he is only 27. Alot of power pitcher improve with age. I would like to believe our pitching coach sees something that would make a difference but the guy has been here all of 5 minutes, so I dont think thats the case. But if you were to pick a guy likely to improve he would look like matt garza. A big durable hard thrower. Problem is we gave up a package as if he is already that pitcher they are projecting.
I really like the effect this will have on our bullpen. We really have 4 guys with a shot at 200 innings. I think our bullpen alreday has a chance to be real good but with the durability of the pitchers we ahve they can be elite. If you look at teams that outperform their run differential and preseason simulations they all have great bullpens.
At first I was OK with the deal, but now I'm not so sure...
People can’t be this upset over nothing, right? Did the Cubs really sacrifice too much talent for just a “good” pitcher? Is everyone overreacting or did Hendry really mess up? I need reassurance!!!!!!!
"A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality." John Lennon
"My favorite food is Macaroni and Cheese, from the blue box." Geovany Soto
"They played like son of a guns......lord have mercy." Mike Quade
I reassure you this is a good deal...maybe.
"What's that? Ah -- Playoffs? Don't talk about -- playoffs?! You kidding me?! Playoffs?! I just hope we can win a game! Another game!" - Jim Mora
probably both
overreacting and gave up too much.
The negativity on this trade is amazing.
The Cubs needed a top of the rotation guy and Garza will be that coming from the AL East. And these were prospects. Archer could very well end up as a bullpen guy. Time will tell. But to say the Cubs have no chance this year tells me you don’t watch enough baseball. Nobody predicted the Sox in 2005 or the Cardinals in 2006. And I’m sure you all had your money on the Giants last year. Cmon. It’s baseball. Anything can happen.
Top of the rotation.
I agree the Cubs need one. The question is whether Garza and his ERA+ of 101 last season is it. By the way, Shaun Marcum’s ERA+ last season was 114. Considering Garza was nowhere to be found on any leaderboard in the AL last season, I question the TOR claim.
Add in the fact that Garza is an above average flyball pitcher in Wrigley and there is room to doubt.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
by rlpete on Jan 7, 2011 8:44 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Zach Greinke
People are so mesmerized by his 2009 season
they seem to push dismiss his 2010 season
ERa+ 100
WAR 2.4
Plus all his head issues
Garza could end up being the better pick up, yea i know a stretch but it annoys me that brewers SP instantly being portrayed as #1
I loved this headline from a random Rays blog
http://www.raysindex.com/2011/01/cubs-and-rays-close-to-deal-for-matt-garza.html#comments
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
i thought that was pretty cool, also
I just want to win...
by bilbosbuttons on Jan 7, 2011 7:20 PM CST up reply actions
this trade
shows me the cubs want to win. and now big z has a anger management buddy to go to meetings with.
Put plainly
The Cubs overpaid for a good pitcher. This is the sort of deal that would make sense if the Cubs were one or two pieces away from competing in the NL…but I really don’t see what this accomplishes given the current makeup of the team.Even factoring in his upside, the Cubs just acquired a potential decent #2 starter. If he keeps producing at the same level he has over the past three years, he’ll be a middle of the rotation guy. Matt Garza is not a game-changer.
Moreover, now the Cubs are apparently over payroll and will have to trade some guys away. In trading for Garza, they might have to give up quality players like Gorzelanny and Fukudome. That is problematic. Plus, as much as people love to bag on prospects, the fact of the matter is that the Cubs just gave up more to get Garza than the Brewers did to get Greinke. Even if you think prospects won’t turn out, they have value as trade commodities. This is the sort of package that could have been used to land Adrian Gonzalez with a few tweaks. Instead of acquiring someone like Gonzalez, we get Garza. That’s also problematic.
I am not a fan of this deal. If the Cubs just got bounced from the NLCS because of shaky pitching, fine, I’d understand it. I didn’t think this team would do much better than .500 next season. My opinion hasn’t really changed because of Garza.
by Outshined_One on Jan 7, 2011 7:25 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
The Cubs gave up more than the Brewers gave up for Shaun Marcum too.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
What gets me...
Is that this is the kind of package that could have been used to get Grienke or Adrian Gonzalez. The prospects given up in those deals were, overall, better than what the Cubs gave up to get Garza, but not by a whole lot. Those are two guys who could have drastically swung the Cubs’ chances in favor of being in contention for the NL. I don’t see that with Garza.
by Outshined_One on Jan 8, 2011 2:49 AM CST up reply actions
I don't think the Cubs could have swung either of those deals
Each team wanted things the Cubs don’t have but the reason I do hate this deal is that
if the Cubs had kept Archer and Lee there is a good chance they could be used later in a package for a player they needed far more especially next year when they will need several starting position players. It was worth the risk that they would have good seasons and increase their value. Making a win now trade on a team with a ton of weaknesses is a bad deal.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 8, 2011 10:40 AM CST up reply actions
My sense of the trade negativity is that
it really is less about the trade itself and more about a realization that sure, anytime you can add a strong pitcher it makes the team better, but this doesn’t really address the major holes of this team. I remain terribly disappointed that year after year this team doesn’t seem to understand how damaging it has been to not have a genuine leadoff hitter. I realize good leadoff hitters aren’t growing on trees but c’mon. Year after year this offense stumbles because we don’t have anyone who can manufacture a run, steal a base, create havoc on the bases.
we just traded one away
(leadoff hitter)
follow me on twitter for fantasy sports analysis @http://twitter.com/DrewDinkmeyer or get the full analysis at www.fantistics.com
by DartmouthCubsFan on Jan 7, 2011 7:36 PM CST up reply actions
Maybe BJax is on the way?
But really, Lee was our sparkly speed guy.
"Playoffs?!" -Jim Mora
by Castro Por Presidente on Jan 7, 2011 7:37 PM CST up reply actions
Why the haters.....?
Just not understanding all the negative comments about aquiring a solid #2 mlb pitcher?Excellent pick up imo and we gave up unproven players for a proven one!
Do you also like paying $2000 for a TV
when your neighbor paid $1000 for the same TV?
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
by rlpete on Jan 7, 2011 8:46 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Because you're using hard numbers
in the cost for the TV analogy.
The cost of the prospects has such a huge window of uncertainty, it cannot be quantitized at this point in time.
We won’t know this until those players in both trades begin to pan (or not) pan out.
Just win the next game...!
I don't get it Al
…so I figured I’d post one and also explain a little bit about why I’m OK with this trade after having stated that I didn’t want to give up Chris Archer in any deal for Matt Garza.
So if you’re okay with the trade now, why weren’t you yesterday or the day before? What changed?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Jan 7, 2011 9:07 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Look.
Do I love this deal? No. It is a lot to give up.
But I do like Garza, and I do think he will improve in the NL Central. It makes the major league team better.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Instead he'll be facing Pujols, Holliday, Rasmus, Berkman...
…Fielder, Braun, Hart, Votto, Bruce, Phillips, and of course, Theriot.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Easy.
Ballhawk and I were just asking a question.
I thought discussion was the point of this site. Jeez.
by elgato on Jan 8, 2011 8:04 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Exactly
I actually thought Al laid out some pretty good arguments in favor of this deal at the top of this original fanpost. And those were all arguments that could have been stated before the deal went down. So my confusion comes from not having heard these arguments from him before – hence the question of “what changed?”
If Al ever wonders why he gets accused of being the Cubs Chief Apologist all the time, this is one of the reasons why.
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Jan 8, 2011 12:59 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Jim Hendry and the Cubs made this deal! So it has to be good! We need to show trust in them..When have they steered us wrong?
by TJ11 on Jan 7, 2011 10:15 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Yes, TJ.
Ricketts “gets it” because he’s a rich boy who sat in the bleachers. Hendry “gets it” because he brought Kerry Wood back who also “gets it.” Garza “gets it” because he pitched in the World Series. With this many people “getting it,” what could go wrong?
I don't get it either.
And people (like Al) were trying to rationalize this trade earlier by waiting to see what prospects we got—even though it doesn’t appear that the prospects we got are of any significance.
So where does that leave us? I don’t understand why Al is working so hard to justify this trade.
I would have been thrilled had this kind of trade been made after the ‘08 season when the team was closer to contention. But this team shouldn’t be talking about contention. Like most seem to be saying, this move was made at absolutely the wrong time. No I don’t hate Garza. He’s going to be Ted Lilly 2.0—which is a good thing for the most part. But you don’t give away two of your top prospects for it in a year that they probably won’t be contending.
It’s embarrassing that we have to rationalize this move.
by mic on Jan 8, 2011 7:44 AM CST up reply actions
No I'll be watching the Cubs mired in the middle of the NL Central standings
I’ve been watching them since the 60’s without a championship so what is a few more years?
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
by rlpete on Jan 8, 2011 8:14 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I'm a long time member....
of the “can Jim Hendry” club. But I like the trade.
I know it’s not a popular sentiment, but I can’t be the only guy at BCB who holds the following opinion:
It’s prospects, PROSPECTS, for a player who is young, good, and under club control for several years. Even if it’s a high-ranked prospect, it’s a PROSPECT! They haven’t proven anything, nothing.
Now mind you, if it was a deal that traded several “top” prospects for a 36-year-old player with a year left on his contract, then yes, prospects are the better end of the trade. But I will never oppose trading prospect for a young, proven, quality player who has demonstrated the ability to perform solidly at the major league level; especially not one with YEARS left on his contract.
It’s PROSPECTS, people, and not for some thirty-something player with a big contract or an expiring contract – prospects for a quality young player who has performed in the majors, playoffs, and World Series already.
Sheesh! Am I really alone in this?……..It’s PROSPECTS!
Official MCM Pessimist.
Congratulations, Bud Adams! By giving Jeff Fisher AT LEAST an 18th year to fail, you have pretty much guaranteed you will not live to see your team win a Super Bowl Championship. Thanks for caring more about Jeff Fisher than about winning.
by The Jade Scorpion on Jan 7, 2011 10:39 PM CST reply actions
Oh heck I am going to double post this
( even if Al thinks it is mean) Here is Keith Law’s response to the “it is just prospects” justification of this trade from a Cub fan who posted that on his blog.
“One thing to always keep in mind, that a lot of people don’t, is that prospects are just prospects. "
Wow, thank God you’re here to remind us of that. We’ve never, ever had anyone throw that out there as a desperate attempt to rationalize the fact that his favorite team just gave up a ton of young talent for an insufficient return. Thank you for enlightening us all.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 7, 2011 10:56 PM CST up reply actions
Talking 'bout PROSPECTS!
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
by ballhawk on Jan 8, 2011 12:20 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
LOL
Bump!
Official MCM Pessimist.
Congratulations, Bud Adams! By giving Jeff Fisher AT LEAST an 18th year to fail, you have pretty much guaranteed you will not live to see your team win a Super Bowl Championship. Thanks for caring more about Jeff Fisher than about winning.
by The Jade Scorpion on Jan 9, 2011 3:16 PM CST up reply actions
I'll leave you with this
Garza 2010 Home opponents line: .237 / .298 / .401
Garza 2010 Road opponents line: .258 / .317 / .435
Garza is an extreme flyball pitcher and the Trop is a pitcher’s park. Soriano better get ready.
We’ll see shortly how good Garza is. I think that is the main point of contention. Many people see Garza as Ted Lilly 2.0 and in that case, it was an expensive deal. If he is a Top 10 arm as Hendry proclaims then it was a good deal.
John Grabow: $4.8 million in 2011.
Getting excited for Cubs baseball
This was a good deal. I have been down on this organization during this off season but I feel this move has put the Cubs in a good position for a variety of outcomes that may unfold in the upcoming season.
If we are winners,then great. This team is full of good ballplayers. We get to see our real prospects in their first full MLB season. We get to see if elite players like Soriano and Ramirez can become a force again (Soriano made great strides last season). If our new first baseman finds his groove, I think we will see these two improve. The slumps were in abundance last season and it was very easy to pitch around this line up. New season. Also, the pitching depth / quality is much improved. We have flexibility. That being said, should the season turn sour….. Some big money is coming off the books and we are getting closer to the point where some of the larger contracts may be considerd for trade to a contending team. Not to mention some of our "cheap effective " pitching is wondeful trade material for a contending team. This could result in…prospects.
Looking forward to the season and am curious if another small time deal or two is in the works. Still bummed about Ryno and Larry ( I was afraid that this was a window into the inner goings on) but am ready to let these new guys proove their worth.
There goes one over the fence...a Tru-Link fence.
The Garza trade is a great deal for the Cubs
If anything, this deal sends a message to Cubs fans that 2011 will not be a rebuilding year. I like that Garza is under 30 and under contract for 3 more years. We know what we are getting with him unlike Chris Archer. Archer may or may not be a stud in the majors, but if the Cubs were leading the NL Central on July 31, 2011 and this same deal was made I doubt that the Cubs fans who are criticizing it would be mounting such a vociferous opposition. The trade was done because of the Greinke deal. That trade had a ripple effect and the Cubs must have felt compelled to respond. We see this happen quite a bit in baseball. But I think Greinke is overrated and the jury is out on how Ron Roenicke will handle his pitching staff.
Some Cubs fans hate Jim Hendry and any deal he makes is a bad deal to them. I don’t hate Hendry, but I would have fired him in October 2009 when the Ricketts took over the club. Be that as it may, he’s the GM and he made a good deal with the Rays. He’s in a “damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t” situation. If he had not made this trade, fans would say that the Cubs did nothing this offseason except sign Carlos Pena. If he makes this trade, the fans say that the Cubs are giving up prospects and mortgaging the future. Well, correct me if I’m wrong, but weren’t previous ownerships criticized for not spending money and going after guys to help us win a World Series? Now we have one and fans want us to go back to 1981? Doesn’t make much sense.
Facts to Consider:
1. Matt Garza is 27 years old, projects to cost $26M over the next 3 years, and has posted 2.9, 3.2 and 1.8 WAR the past 3 years. Ted Lilly is 34 years old, costs $33M over the next 3 years, and has posted 3.8, 2.3 and 2.9 WAR over the past 3 years. Garza projects for 3.2, Lilly for 2.9.
2. Shaun Marcum cost the Brewers their top prospect, is under Brewer control for one year, is 29 years old, and has posted 1.3, 2.0 and 3.5 WAR the past 3 years (excluding 2009). He is projected for 3.7.
3. Zach Greinke is 27, and cost the Brewers 4 prospects, one of which was also a top prospect in the Brewer’s system. He’ll cost $27M over the the next 2 seasons. He’s posted a 4.9, 9.4 and 5.2 WAR the past 3 years. He projects for a 6.4.
4. There have been posts stating that there are roughly 30 (+/-) starting ptichers better than Garza. There are 30 MLB teams. This would mean Garza is a #1/#2 starter.
5. Chris Archer has had some control issues and has not yet established a solid 3rd pitch, would be necessary to develop into a top of the rotation starter. Hak Ju Lee has not played above A ball yet.
6. Posters have lamented about Matt Garza being a career 42-44, 3.97 pitcher. Greinke is 60-67, 3.82. Marcum is 37-25, 3.85.
So if I get this right
We could have re-signed Lilly for 7 million more over three years , gotten slightly less but still solid
production and kept all 4 players. Sounds to me like we should have done that. At a minimum some combination of the 4 prospects could have been used for another trade.
Also for one less year the Brewers get an actual Ace.
FYI being in the top 30. Not exactly. Some teams ( Pittsburgh) have no ace at all, some have 2 or more. There is a reasonable chance Garza will be the Cubs #3 starter behind Z & Dempster.
He was not worth the risk of losing what we gave up.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either
by Doggie Stalker on Jan 8, 2011 12:13 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Great Argument
I was never in favor of bringing back Lilly, but that would have been preferable to this move.
by JSB on Jan 8, 2011 2:27 PM CST up reply actions
This is what upsets me
Garza is probably a slight upgrade over Lilly, who we traded last year along with Theriot for DeWitt, Wallach, and Smit.
Then we turn around and trade 2 legit prospects and change to get a little better. Over the next three years Garza probably remains Lilly 2.0 while the actual Lilly probably becomes a bit less effective as he gets older.
This does not look like the Cubs are building to win now and building to win in the future. That would have been keeping Lilly and our prospects.
Only building to win in the future would have looked like trading Lilly and keeping the prospects.
Only building to win now would have looked like keeping Lilly and trading the prospects to get Garza.
What this is…I don’t know. But it looks like paying a premium for marginal improvement.
"Playoffs?!" -Jim Mora
by Castro Por Presidente on Jan 8, 2011 2:35 PM CST up reply actions
C'mon Jessica
There has been debate as to how valuable a starter Garza is. It’s not about where he’ll fit in the Cubs rotation, it’s about his value as a starter across MLB. I’d submit he’s a #2 starter.
YEAH HENDRY
It slays me that people are happy about this . Its 24 hours later and people are championing this like the cubs have a shot this year . Who fills in at first if and when Pena gets hurt ? No one . Cubs have no back up first baseman , but we do have 8 starters!!! Z , Demp , Wells , Garza , Gorz , Silva , Cashner , and Shark !!! This deal is bad , it felt bad when it happened and there are articles all over the place where analysts feel the Rays made out . I understand that prospects are prospects and no one knows what they are going to accomplish but this just feels like Hendry had to do something to make it seem like the Cubs are going to compete . The Rays have been saying since the winter meeting that they weren’t going to move Garza unless they were "blown away by a deal " … Its like an action film where the hero says " give me your car " and the owner says no way " then he hands him a brief case filled with a million dollars of the bad guys money and quips " buy a new one " … Blown away …
Even if this ultimately turns into another Carter-for-Sutcliffe deal, it's still a good move...
Very likely the public’s reluctance to underwrite 300MM in bonds for Clan Ricketts helped force a move to Plan B, along with an apparent rejection of the Tampa Bay small-market success strategy. Obviously, a competitive team in 2011 will give politicians the cover and support they need to cut a deal on W.F. financing.
"Elder White! Look at the talent on those Cubs!" Harry Caray, KMOX Radio, 4/22/62
"And you have to wonder – What's the matter with Broglio?" Harry, KMOX, 5/24/64
late to the party but a couple thoughts........
I’m not really buying the league change. As people have noted, Garza’s a fly ball pitcher moving to a friendly homer park. He was also behind maybe the best defense in baseball, now he’s going to be pitching in front of the worst defenses in all of baseball.
The part I find most interesting about this deal is that this comes from the owner who’s cried wolf about how there’s little to no payroll room, but goes out and approves a deal to trade almost 20 years of cost-controlled young players for an expensive, three year player, who most likely will become a Super2, thus making him even more expensive.
I’m just not sure I see a plan. What is the plan? Tommy comes out and says he wants to build form within, but goes out and trades two top prospects for an expensive, middling pitcher. As a Cub fan, I could get behind a total rebuild. I also think if you show your fanbase you have a plan in place, they’ll be patient. But I just don’t see that. It’s a vague attempt to be mediocre, and it’s really frustrating to see.
by Bad Midget on Jan 8, 2011 1:01 PM CST reply actions 3 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bleed Cubbie Blue
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Chicago Cubs Game Threads
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Eric Hosmer redefines the Baltimore chop with infield double (Video)
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
