Cubs Acquire Garza for Archer, Lee, Guyer, Chirinos & Fuld

[CubsWin]

How ridiculous does our list still look if you just add Castro and Cashner to it?

Apparently 2nd best ridiculous.

 

Or at least it used to be until this trade. Hope the Cubs get deep into the post season at least once in the next 3 years, otherwise what was the point?

Edited January 8, 2011 by CubsWin

[VicCub]

What about the other guy we got besides Garza, is he any good?

[Cubs Fan Dan]

What about the other guy we got besides Garza, is he any good?

 

The outfielder? No he sucks... the other player has yet to be named.

[Clem Fandango]

What about the other guy we got besides Garza, is he any good?

 

No, but he's got a great sense of humor.

 

Somehow I feel like I'm trying to talk up an ugly woman to one of my friends

[CubsWin]

This guy sums up my feelings on this trade pretty well.

 

yahoo sports

[Hairyducked Idiot]

 

 

That says a lot about how picked clean the system was after all the good ones got called up.

 

8th ranked system in baseball

 

BA is gospel now that they've said something good about the Cubs.

 

I grant that I'm not that up on the minor leagues, but your No. 1 prospect is a guy who isn't striking out at a K/inning pace, your No. 10 prospect is a Guy(er) who just had his first really good season as a 24-year-old at AA. I find the 8th place in baseball thing skepticism-inducing.

[JimSorgi]

This guy sums up my feelings on this trade pretty well.

 

yahoo sports

I still don't understand why people think the Cubs should just give up on the upcoming season.

[Northside Blues]

 

 

That says a lot about how picked clean the system was after all the good ones got called up.

 

8th ranked system in baseball

 

BA is gospel now that they've said something good about the Cubs.

 

I grant that I'm not that up on the minor leagues, but your No. 1 prospect is a guy who isn't striking out at a K/inning pace, your No. 10 prospect is a Guy(er) who just had his first really good season as a 24-year-old at AA. I find the 8th place in baseball thing skepticism-inducing.

Archer's career K/9 is 9.1 and is at 9.6 since being traded to the Cubs.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Archer's career K/9 is 9.1 and is at 9.6 since being traded to the Cubs.

 

You're right. I was just glancing at his AA numbers.

 

I'm sure you guys know this better than me, I just glanced at his results and didn't see anything that screamed "No. 1 prospect in No. 8 system"

[Sammy Sofa]

Archer's career K/9 is 9.1 and is at 9.6 since being traded to the Cubs.

 

You're right. I was just glancing at his AA numbers.

 

I'm sure you guys know this better than me, I just glanced at his results and didn't see anything that screamed "No. 1 prospect in No. 8 system"

 

And that's why the Bum took your job.

[CubsWin]

 

 

That says a lot about how picked clean the system was after all the good ones got called up.

 

8th ranked system in baseball

 

BA is gospel now that they've said something good about the Cubs.

 

I grant that I'm not that up on the minor leagues, but your No. 1 prospect is a guy who isn't striking out at a K/inning pace, your No. 10 prospect is a Guy(er) who just had his first really good season as a 24-year-old at AA. I find the 8th place in baseball thing skepticism-inducing.

You have every right to be skeptical of Jim Callis's ranking of the Cubs organization, but you need to take a closer look at the statistics.

 

Archer most certainly averaged better than a K per inning. Last season he struck out 149 in 142.1 innings. The season before that he struck out 119 in 109 innings. But more importantly hitters averaged .200 last year and .202 the year before. And even more impressive than that was that he allowed just 6 HRs in 142.1 innings in '10 and 0 HRs in 109 innings in '09.

 

As far as Guyer is concerned. He was a 5th round draft pick who improved every year at Virginia hitting .370/.440/.559 in his final season. His career with the Cubs followed the same trajectory. In his first full season in Low-A Peoria he hit .269/.331/.498. The Cubs thought so highly of him that they jumped him all the way to AA in '09. That proved to be to big of a transition, but when they moved him back to High-A, he hit .347/.407/.453. And then last year he conquered AA going .344/.398/.588. At every level on his way up, he OPS'd .830 or higher. He's not old. As a senior college draftee, he's right on schedule. He has above average tools across the board. Good defense, strong accurate arm, hits for excellent average and average power and was the system's best base stealer swiping 30 in 33 attempts last year and 30 in 37 tries in '09. I think it's fair to say he's been good for a bit longer than just last season. To have a guy like that ranked 10th, says a lot about the strength of the Cubs organization.

 

At least before they made this trade...

[dew1679666265]

Zack Greinke pitched in the majors for 5 years and had a pedestrian 4.28 career ERA to show for it, but he had a lot of potential. He won the Cy Young the following year.

 

And then he returned to the pitcher he was the next year.

 

Because he didn't give a [expletive] and more or less reduced the amount of breaking pitches he threw the 2nd half of the season to save his arm

 

His ERA in May was 4.10, in June was 4.81 and in July was 4.09. He had two good ERA months last year (April and August). That doesn't look like a guy who was tearing it up the first half of the year. His WHIPs in May and June were 1.2, the level of his 2007 and 2008 years.

[dew1679666265]

Expanding on what I posted...

 

I think Matt Garza will improve marginally in the NL. His peripherals the past three years seem to suggest he'll be reasonably good, but that's about the extent of it. He's not an ace. With some luck, he could produce somewhere along the lines of a Ryan Dempster or a Ted Lilly. Overall, I can't complain about him in a vacuum.

 

Starting at the low end of the deal, Fuld and Chirinos are essentially throw-ins. We all know about Fuld. Chirinos is old for a catcher, good character guy, and maybe will be a good backup in the majors. I don't see Chirinos hitting in the majors like he did this past season. No hard loss.

 

Guyer's one of those intriguing guys who might have some decent upside left in him. He's a tweener and probably a 4th OF if he doesn't continue to develop power. Still, he could be a useful role player.

 

I'm unsurprised the Cubs had to give up value. Hak-Ju Lee is probably on the low end of the top prospects in the Cubs' system. He spent the whole season in Low A, hasn't shown a lick of usable power, and and still has work left to do. Still, his upside is incredibly tantalizing. Losing him hurts.

 

If the Cubs gave up Lee and a comparable B-/B prospect, I'd be okay. But Archer? Egh. He's got Marmol-level stuff and could stick as a starter. Even if he doesn't, he could have tremendous value in relief. His control issues are well-known, but there's a reason he was the #1 prospect in the Cubs' system. There's enough of a chance that his production could meet Garza's over the next five years that I'm not happy with the Cubs giving Archer up in addition to this package.

 

I don't know a whole lot about Perez other than he's a speedster who was injured. We'll see about the PTBNL.

 

So, in short, considering there's a reasonable enough chance that this package of prospects outperforms Garza + prospects over the next five years...I'm not too happy.

 

This sums up my thoughts very well. I just don't see the Cubs getting the better end of the value here.

[CubsWin]

Expanding on what I posted...

 

I think Matt Garza will improve marginally in the NL. His peripherals the past three years seem to suggest he'll be reasonably good, but that's about the extent of it. He's not an ace. With some luck, he could produce somewhere along the lines of a Ryan Dempster or a Ted Lilly. Overall, I can't complain about him in a vacuum.

 

Starting at the low end of the deal, Fuld and Chirinos are essentially throw-ins. We all know about Fuld. Chirinos is old for a catcher, good character guy, and maybe will be a good backup in the majors. I don't see Chirinos hitting in the majors like he did this past season. No hard loss.

 

Guyer's one of those intriguing guys who might have some decent upside left in him. He's a tweener and probably a 4th OF if he doesn't continue to develop power. Still, he could be a useful role player.

 

I'm unsurprised the Cubs had to give up value. Hak-Ju Lee is probably on the low end of the top prospects in the Cubs' system. He spent the whole season in Low A, hasn't shown a lick of usable power, and and still has work left to do. Still, his upside is incredibly tantalizing. Losing him hurts.

 

If the Cubs gave up Lee and a comparable B-/B prospect, I'd be okay. But Archer? Egh. He's got Marmol-level stuff and could stick as a starter. Even if he doesn't, he could have tremendous value in relief. His control issues are well-known, but there's a reason he was the #1 prospect in the Cubs' system. There's enough of a chance that his production could meet Garza's over the next five years that I'm not happy with the Cubs giving Archer up in addition to this package.

 

I don't know a whole lot about Perez other than he's a speedster who was injured. We'll see about the PTBNL.

 

So, in short, considering there's a reasonable enough chance that this package of prospects outperforms Garza + prospects over the next five years...I'm not too happy.

 

This sums up my thoughts very well. I just don't see the Cubs getting the better end of the value here.

Add in the weird timing of the trade in that it isn't very likely that Garza is the missing piece to get the Cubs to the World Series much less the post season in the next couple years and it makes me feel even worse about the trade.

[dew1679666265]

Add in the weird timing of the trade in that it isn't very likely that Garza is the missing piece to get the Cubs to the World Series much less the post season in the next couple years and it makes me feel even worse about the trade.

 

He makes it more likely that we reach the postseason and in a weak division that's fine. Being more likely to make it isn't worth giving up two of your top 5 prospects for a guy whose peripherals are very similar to Wells, though.

 

I'd have loved Garza if we could have gotten him at a good price. But there was really no reason to overpay the way we did. He's just not been good enough to warrant it.

[Guest]

Expanding on what I posted...

 

I think Matt Garza will improve marginally in the NL. His peripherals the past three years seem to suggest he'll be reasonably good, but that's about the extent of it. He's not an ace. With some luck, he could produce somewhere along the lines of a Ryan Dempster or a Ted Lilly. Overall, I can't complain about him in a vacuum.

 

Starting at the low end of the deal, Fuld and Chirinos are essentially throw-ins. We all know about Fuld. Chirinos is old for a catcher, good character guy, and maybe will be a good backup in the majors. I don't see Chirinos hitting in the majors like he did this past season. No hard loss.

 

Guyer's one of those intriguing guys who might have some decent upside left in him. He's a tweener and probably a 4th OF if he doesn't continue to develop power. Still, he could be a useful role player.

 

I'm unsurprised the Cubs had to give up value. Hak-Ju Lee is probably on the low end of the top prospects in the Cubs' system. He spent the whole season in Low A, hasn't shown a lick of usable power, and and still has work left to do. Still, his upside is incredibly tantalizing. Losing him hurts.

 

If the Cubs gave up Lee and a comparable B-/B prospect, I'd be okay. But Archer? Egh. He's got Marmol-level stuff and could stick as a starter. Even if he doesn't, he could have tremendous value in relief. His control issues are well-known, but there's a reason he was the #1 prospect in the Cubs' system. There's enough of a chance that his production could meet Garza's over the next five years that I'm not happy with the Cubs giving Archer up in addition to this package.

 

I don't know a whole lot about Perez other than he's a speedster who was injured. We'll see about the PTBNL.

 

So, in short, considering there's a reasonable enough chance that this package of prospects outperforms Garza + prospects over the next five years...I'm not too happy.

 

This sums up my thoughts very well. I just don't see the Cubs getting the better end of the value here.

Add in the weird timing of the trade in that it isn't very likely that Garza is the missing piece to get the Cubs to the World Series much less the post season in the next couple years and it makes me feel even worse about the trade.

 

That's my issue. In 2003, I had visions of a dynasty. Strong farm system, good young talent already on the team, bad contracts coming off the books and and an increasing payroll. The stars were aligned to be good for a very long time. The wheels sorta came off, however. Prospects were traded for average talent rather than difference makers, big contracts were handed out to players who were not difference makers, etc....

 

I had a vision of those stars realigning with a new strong farm system, some bad contracts coming off the books soon, some good young talent already on the team, and now the GM is basically attempting to save his job by turning a potential 4th place team into maybe a 1st place team, maybe a 3rd place team. Can't blame him for that, I suppose. But I worry that this patchwork offseason kills off the potential for a long run of success.

[CubsWin]

Expanding on what I posted...

 

I think Matt Garza will improve marginally in the NL. His peripherals the past three years seem to suggest he'll be reasonably good, but that's about the extent of it. He's not an ace. With some luck, he could produce somewhere along the lines of a Ryan Dempster or a Ted Lilly. Overall, I can't complain about him in a vacuum.

 

Starting at the low end of the deal, Fuld and Chirinos are essentially throw-ins. We all know about Fuld. Chirinos is old for a catcher, good character guy, and maybe will be a good backup in the majors. I don't see Chirinos hitting in the majors like he did this past season. No hard loss.

 

Guyer's one of those intriguing guys who might have some decent upside left in him. He's a tweener and probably a 4th OF if he doesn't continue to develop power. Still, he could be a useful role player.

 

I'm unsurprised the Cubs had to give up value. Hak-Ju Lee is probably on the low end of the top prospects in the Cubs' system. He spent the whole season in Low A, hasn't shown a lick of usable power, and and still has work left to do. Still, his upside is incredibly tantalizing. Losing him hurts.

 

If the Cubs gave up Lee and a comparable B-/B prospect, I'd be okay. But Archer? Egh. He's got Marmol-level stuff and could stick as a starter. Even if he doesn't, he could have tremendous value in relief. His control issues are well-known, but there's a reason he was the #1 prospect in the Cubs' system. There's enough of a chance that his production could meet Garza's over the next five years that I'm not happy with the Cubs giving Archer up in addition to this package.

 

I don't know a whole lot about Perez other than he's a speedster who was injured. We'll see about the PTBNL.

 

So, in short, considering there's a reasonable enough chance that this package of prospects outperforms Garza + prospects over the next five years...I'm not too happy.

 

This sums up my thoughts very well. I just don't see the Cubs getting the better end of the value here.

Add in the weird timing of the trade in that it isn't very likely that Garza is the missing piece to get the Cubs to the World Series much less the post season in the next couple years and it makes me feel even worse about the trade.

 

That's my issue. In 2003, I had visions of a dynasty. Strong farm system, good young talent already on the team, bad contracts coming off the books and and an increasing payroll. The stars were aligned to be good for a very long time. The wheels sorta came off, however. Prospects were traded for average talent rather than difference makers, big contracts were handed out to players who were not difference makers, etc....

 

I had a vision of those stars realigning with a new strong farm system, some bad contracts coming off the books soon, some good young talent already on the team, and now the GM is basically attempting to save his job by turning a potential 4th place team into maybe a 1st place team, maybe a 3rd place team. Can't blame him for that, I suppose. But I worry that this patchwork offseason kills off the potential for a long run of success.

That's my thing, too. I had visions of a dynasty with these prospects and the Cubs considerable financial resources. Garza's a good addition and will be under the team's control for 3 more years, but he will also be getting more expensive each year assuming he continues to perform as he has or better. What free agents would the Cubs have been able to sign if his salary weren't on the books and Archer was in the rotation?

[dew1679666265]

I had a vision of those stars realigning with a new strong farm system, some bad contracts coming off the books soon, some good young talent already on the team, and now the GM is basically attempting to save his job by turning a potential 4th place team into maybe a 1st place team, maybe a 3rd place team. Can't blame him for that, I suppose. But I worry that this patchwork offseason kills off the potential for a long run of success.

 

The good thing about this trade is that we didn't deal from areas of weakness. After dumping Archer, we still have JJax, Carpenter, McNutt, Cashner, Diamond and some intriguing arms in the low minors. After Lee at SS, we have Flaherty, Lake and of course Castro. Guyer doesn't really hurt that much, since we still have BJax, Colvin (for whatever you think of him), Szczur and others. Hendry didn't weaken any already weak areas, so we should be able to rebound from the losses.

[CubsWin]

Add in the weird timing of the trade in that it isn't very likely that Garza is the missing piece to get the Cubs to the World Series much less the post season in the next couple years and it makes me feel even worse about the trade.

 

He makes it more likely that we reach the postseason and in a weak division that's fine. Being more likely to make it isn't worth giving up two of your top 5 prospects for a guy whose peripherals are very similar to Wells, though.

 

I'd have loved Garza if we could have gotten him at a good price. But there was really no reason to overpay the way we did. He's just not been good enough to warrant it.

Garza at a good price would have been awesome. The Rays were in a tough spot. His salary is about to double. They just lost Pena, Crawford and Soriano. Their chances of competing in the AL East just got a lot worse. They have Hellickson waiting. It is time for them to go young and cheap again and build it up again. The Rays got everything they wanted. Why? Because Hendry wanted to try to save his job.

 

Well, his job is to build a winner, a World Series winner, not get a paycheck.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

 

And that's why the Bum took your job.

 

He didn't take it. I gave it to him!

 

I'm going to rip you *so* hard in a column.

[CubsWin]

I had a vision of those stars realigning with a new strong farm system, some bad contracts coming off the books soon, some good young talent already on the team, and now the GM is basically attempting to save his job by turning a potential 4th place team into maybe a 1st place team, maybe a 3rd place team. Can't blame him for that, I suppose. But I worry that this patchwork offseason kills off the potential for a long run of success.

 

The good thing about this trade is that we didn't deal from areas of weakness. After dumping Archer, we still have JJax, Carpenter, McNutt, Cashner, Diamond and some intriguing arms in the low minors. After Lee at SS, we have Flaherty, Lake and of course Castro. Guyer doesn't really hurt that much, since we still have BJax, Colvin (for whatever you think of him), Szczur and others. Hendry didn't weaken any already weak areas, so we should be able to rebound from the losses.

True, and on the bright side, the Cubs have Garza in the rotation for the next 3 years which should be nice.

 

Question is will it be enough to win it all or would the Cubs chances have been better with the money savings of not paying Garza, Archer in the rotation at league minimum and Lee continuing his development into a sharp fielding, base stealing, solid hitting lead-off man at the league minimum once he reaches the bigs? Add in the possibility of trading Colvin for value if Guyer plays well enough and it hurts even more. None of that is guaranteed to happen, but the chances aren't bad either.

[dew1679666265]

Well, his job is to build a winner, a World Series winner, not get a paycheck.

 

That's the thing with the Garza trade, is it makes us a better team and gets the current team closer to a World Series. However, it doesn't get us so much closer that it was worth giving up the prospects we gave up. That's my problem with it.

 

Hendry didn't go get a bad baseball player or anything. Garza is good, just not that good.

[Guest]

What free agents would the Cubs have been able to sign if his salary weren't on the books and Archer was in the rotation?

 

I can't remember all the big names the Cubs missed out on when they signed the guys they did, but they always seemed to be too short of money or the position was already filled or the talent to trade wasn't there each time a guy like ARod, Carlos Beltran, Mark Teixiera, Vladmir Guerrero, etc... came available. Making trades for guys like Garza are trades you make when he is the missing piece of the puzzle. Right now, the Cubs are still missing a lot of puzzle pieces. Unfortunately, we don't really know how many pieces are still missing, though. Can DeWitt/Baker provide decent production at 2b. Soto is coming off of shoulder surgery. Colvin got stabbed with a bat. Pena hit under .200 last year and is facing pitchers he's never seen before as he changes leagues. Fukudome has been the red headed step child. Soriano is another year older. Pitching looks solid, but the offense could sputter.

[dew1679666265]

Question is will it be enough to win it all or would the Cubs chances have been better with the money savings of not paying Garza, Archer in the rotation at league minimum and Lee continuing his development into a sharp fielding, base stealing, solid hitting lead-off man at the league minimum once he reaches the bigs? Add in the possibility of trading Colvin for value if Guyer plays well enough and it hurts even more. None of that is guaranteed to happen, but the chances aren't bad either.

 

The only player that it may hurt the big league club anytime soon to lose is Archer and he's really the only guy I have a big problem with being in this deal. Between Flaherty and Lake, there's a decent chance the Cubs get a second baseman who can be productive at the ML level with Castro at short. We can also still trade Colvin if a deal presents itself because we have Soriano under contract for 4 more years (and going nowhere), BJax coming up and can always find a decently priced, productive FA OF (Byrd, for instance). I'm not that sold on Guyer being highly productive anyway. The rest of the deal is basically AAAA filler (Fuld and Chirinos).

 

In trading Archer, though, we eliminated the possible upside he had of being an ace at minimal cost for a guy who might still have ace potential, but who we're paying $5-6+ million to. If he doesn't continue to outpitch his xFIP, then he'll be overpaid pretty quickly. For Garza to be worth the cost both in money and prospects, he'll have to pitch at least as well as his ERA/WHIP indicated in Tampa, if not better, and continue to outpitch his peripherals (or improve them). That's a steep hope.

[CubsWin]

In trading Archer, though, we eliminated the possible upside he had of being an ace at minimal cost for a guy who might still have ace potential, but who we're paying $5-6+ million to. If he doesn't continue to outpitch his xFIP, then he'll be overpaid pretty quickly. For Garza to be worth the cost both in money and prospects, he'll have to pitch at least as well as his ERA/WHIP indicated in Tampa, if not better, and continue to outpitch his peripherals (or improve them). That's a steep hope.

Exactly. And the Cubs will only be paying Garza $5-6 million for this coming season with the likelihood of it going up into 10 million and higher for the following two seasons.