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

[Backtobanks]

Does anyone here think that this trade paves the way for Z getting traded at some point during this season, perhaps at the deadline if the Cubs are out of it?

 

Not with his contract.

 

No argument that he is still owed alot ($36mil) but that is for this year and next, correct? The Yankees were willing to throw a boatload at Lee to sign him, and one would think Z might waive his NTC to reunite with Rothschild. the Cubs could always throw in some cash as well.

 

I don't see the point to trade for Garza and then turn around and trade Zambrano while throwing in cash. I think the trade for Garza was made to sell tickets this year while the team is competitive (and maybe contending) and for definite contention for 2012. I suppose they might try to trade Zambrano if one of the prospects steps up and is phenomenal during the spring, but I don't see that happening.

[Clem Fandango]

I believe the Z to the Yankees rumor was already floated this offseason and Cashman shot it down completely

[Northside Blues]

I'm not surprised. From a pure scouting standpoint, there's no reason that Matt Garza can't be that. He's got a power four seam fastball that sits comfortably 93-95 and tops out 97-98. He's also got a quality two seam in the low 90s. He's got a quality hard slider and serviceable curves and changes. While his performance to date pegs him as a #3 guy, in the NL with some more development (he was only 26 last year), it's not inconceivable that he can't become a top 30 pitcher. You watch him pitch and you certainly see why scouts and Hendry would think that.

 

 

I'm not saying it's right or wrong. I'm just saying I see where he comes from. The last couple of times I remember him pulling one out of his arse like that were Mark DeRosa and Michael Barrett. Here's to hoping it turns out like those did. Matt Clement was another guy who he got and developed. Hendry's pretty good at targeting guys who haven't played up to their "scouting" ability and watched them mature into it. It's one of his saving graces as a GM.

[dew1679666265]

Take it however you want, but I sorta know someone in the Cubs org (someone that directly reports to Hendry), and I was told that Hendry believes, based on what him and his scouts have seen, that the Cubs just acquired a Cy Young caliber ace for the next decade.

 

Thanks for the info and that's good to hear. I figured Hendry must have seen something that he really loved in Garza and was hoping he wasn't just looking at a good ERA/WHIP and assuming he'd continue to be good.

Maybe he also hits well with runners in scoring position.

 

Career RISP: .167 OPS

[PackLandVA]

I believe the Z to the Yankees rumor was already floated this offseason and Cashman shot it down completely

 

Well then it must be true if Cashman said so.

[dew1679666265]

I'm not saying it's right or wrong. I'm just saying I see where he comes from. The last couple of times I remember him pulling one out of his arse like that were Mark DeRosa and Michael Barrett. Here's to hoping it turns out like those did. Matt Clement was another guy who he got and developed. Hendry's pretty good at targeting guys who haven't played up to their "scouting" ability and watched them mature into it. It's one of his saving graces as a GM.

 

The great thing about DeRosa and Barrett is we didn't spend much to see if they could take that next step. Clement was in the Dontrelle trade, but the key pieces were Dontrelle and Alf and Clement was kind of a throw-in.

 

I do generally trust Hendry's scouting eye, so hopefully this works out. I still think we gave up too much, though.

[Northside Blues]

I don't know. It goes both ways. If you trust his scouting eye on Garza, then you've gotta trust his scouting eye on say, Archer.

[Northside Blues]

I think this move (coupled with the others) should put us in the 84-85 win range, giving us a fair shot at 90 and the division. Maybe 1 in 5 chance of winning the central and another 1 in 10 chance or so of winning the WC. Maybe a 1 in 4 to 1 in 3 chance of making the post season. Without Garza we'd probably be a 1 in 10 chance of the division and a 1 in 20 chance of winning the WC. So basically a 1 in 10 chance of making the post season. So if you consider this move as taking our post season liklihood of 10% to 30%, youve gotta like it. It would take or WS chance from like 1 in 100 to around 1 in 25.

[dew1679666265]

I don't know. It goes both ways. If you trust his scouting eye on Garza, then you've gotta trust his scouting eye on say, Archer.

 

Trusting his scouting eye makes me feel a little better about the trade and Garza's potential for us, it doesn't make me agree with it. There are still the stats that make me wary about him and the potential (and cheap production) Archer brings to the table. That Hendry feels that strongly about Garza makes me feel a little better, but it doesn't convince me to like the trade.

 

Does that make sense?

[dew1679666265]

I think this move (coupled with the others) should put us in the 84-85 win range, giving us a fair shot at 90 and the division. Maybe 1 in 5 chance of winning the central and another 1 in 10 chance or so of winning the WC. Maybe a 1 in 4 to 1 in 3 chance of making the post season. Without Garza we'd probably be a 1 in 10 chance of the division and a 1 in 20 chance of winning the WC. So basically a 1 in 10 chance of making the post season. So if you consider this move as taking our post season liklihood of 10% to 30%, youve gotta like it. It would take or WS chance from like 1 in 100 to around 1 in 25.

 

Unless Garza really takes a big step forward immediately, I don't see him being that big an upgrade. Especially if this bumps Wells or Cashner from the rotation instead of Gorzo or Silva. Or if it pushes Fuku out the door.

[Northside Blues]

Cashner is probably a non-factor in the rotation this year. Stuff's there command won't. While going through the growing pains is something every young pitcher must go through before becoming a factor, I really wouldn't expect anything more than a 5.00 RA from him this year if he was an SP. Anything else would be a bonus. To me, he seems like a guy who would need a good 100-150 pro SP innings before he'd be a difference maker. Long term it'd probably be better if he was in the rotation this year. I think him and Silva are fairly useless. I think Wells and Gorzelanny have use in them. I do think Garza is a considerable upgrade over Cashner and Silva, as is. If he adjusts to the NL and improves, he's a huge upgrade over them. He's probably, as is, a 4.20 NL RA guy. I'd peg Silva and Cashner close to 5.00. I'd peg Gorzelanny and Wells close to 4.50. Over 200 innings and 32 starts, he'd be about 2 wins better than Silva and Cashner. He'd be a little under a win better than Gorzelanny and Wells. Of course, his ceiling is a lot higher. I don't think anyone would be surprised if he had an ERA closer to 3 than 4. Two wins when you're looking like an 82 or 83 win team is a lot. The Cubs are right where each individual win means a lot. I think the Cubs would be best going with:

 

Rotation:

Garza

Wells

Gorzelanny

Zambrano

Dempster

 

Bullpen

Marmol

Wood

Marshall

Cashner

Grabow

Guzman/Filler/Trash

 

Our bullpen would be above average. Our rotation would be above average. And if we'd be above average on offense I think. I don't think we'd be well above average anywhere, except the back end of our rotation and bullpen.

[mul21]

That would be dumb. Cashner will have huge value as a starter and it's asinine to further stunt his growth by having him do anything other than start, either in Chicago or Iowa.

[SweetZombieJesus]

The great thing about DeRosa and Barrett is we didn't spend much to see if they could take that next step. Clement was in the Dontrelle trade, but the key pieces were Dontrelle and Alf and Clement was kind of a throw-in.

 

Wasn't the two main guys on the cubs end was Ryan Jorgensen (who was coming off a great year in high A) and Crazy Julian.

[Guancous]

Rangers tried to get Garza and almost did

According to Peter Gammons, the Rangers went hard after Matt Garza this week. Club officials made it clear this winter that they were interested in Garza and apparently they tried very hard.

 

Gammons said the Rangers tried to get outfielder Robinson Chirinos from the Cubs and package him in a deal along with pitchers Derek Holland and Frank Francisco, and Minor League outfielder Engel Beltre.

 

But the Rays preferred what they were getting from Chicago because the Cubs were willing to put pitcher Chris Archer in the deal. A source said the Rays were close to doing business with the Rangers, but told the Cubs they could get Garza if they included Archer in the deal.

 

The Cubs huddled and decided to do the deal. If they had said no, the Rangers would have added Garza to the rotation. The Rays ultimately really wanted Archer.

 

I would trade Archer for Derek Holland.

[Northside Blues]

That would be dumb. Cashner will have huge value as a starter and it's asinine to further stunt his growth by having him do anything other than start, either in Chicago or Iowa.

It's not asinine if you don't think he will have huge value as a starter.

[Guancous]

Does anyone here think that this trade paves the way for Z getting traded at some point during this season, perhaps at the deadline if the Cubs are out of it?

 

Not with his contract.

 

There's a one team market for Z right now. And they won't let him hit.

[Guancous]

This trade is justified if Archer becomes a shutdown reliever.

 

Garza is better than Clement and Lilly when they joined the Blue fold.

 

Everyone involved in the trade besides Archer was redundant in the Cubs system. The Cubs stockpile up the middle minor leaguers for trade. It's a smart strategy because they have the highest value relative to their signing.

 

Garza is also outside the injury nexus and should improve facing NL batters who hit in the 8th and 9th spot.

 

The difference between Garza and Greinke is not worth the extra $30 million and uncertainty of the Wrigley microscope. Greinke (justifiably) hates playing the media game. He won't have to answer the same question 15 times after every start in Milwaukee.

 

My main complaint is that an offensive upgrade should be the highest priority. Failing that, there were no pitchers of Garza's caliber that were cost effective on the market. It's Garza for 3/24 or Westbrook for 2/24 (plus Archer and Lee).

[ctcf]

This trade is justified if Archer becomes a shutdown reliever.

 

Garza is better than Clement and Lilly when they joined the Blue fold.

 

Everyone involved in the trade besides Archer was redundant in the Cubs system. The Cubs stockpile up the middle minor leaguers for trade. It's a smart strategy because they have the highest value relative to their signing.

 

Garza is also outside the injury nexus and should improve facing NL batters who hit in the 8th and 9th spot.

 

The difference between Garza and Greinke is not worth the extra $30 million and uncertainty of the Wrigley microscope. Greinke (justifiably) hates playing the media game. He won't have to answer the same question 15 times after every start in Milwaukee.

 

My main complaint is that an offensive upgrade should be the highest priority. Failing that, there were no pitchers of Garza's caliber that were cost effective on the market. It's Garza for 3/24 or Westbrook for 2/24 (plus Archer and Lee).

 

I don't think it's fair to call Lee "redundant". Had he stayed and panned out he would quite conceivably have moved Castro to second in a few seasons.

[Guancous]

This trade is justified if Archer becomes a shutdown reliever.

 

Garza is better than Clement and Lilly when they joined the Blue fold.

 

Everyone involved in the trade besides Archer was redundant in the Cubs system. The Cubs stockpile up the middle minor leaguers for trade. It's a smart strategy because they have the highest value relative to their signing.

 

Garza is also outside the injury nexus and should improve facing NL batters who hit in the 8th and 9th spot.

 

The difference between Garza and Greinke is not worth the extra $30 million and uncertainty of the Wrigley microscope. Greinke (justifiably) hates playing the media game. He won't have to answer the same question 15 times after every start in Milwaukee.

 

My main complaint is that an offensive upgrade should be the highest priority. Failing that, there were no pitchers of Garza's caliber that were cost effective on the market. It's Garza for 3/24 or Westbrook for 2/24 (plus Archer and Lee).

 

I don't think it's fair to call Lee "redundant". Had he stayed and panned out he would quite conceivably have moved Castro to second in a few seasons.

 

True. The only question becomes is whether the 2012 Cubs 2B provides more value than Garza. Time will tell.

[UMFan83]

This trade is justified if Archer becomes a shutdown reliever.

 

Garza is better than Clement and Lilly when they joined the Blue fold.

 

Everyone involved in the trade besides Archer was redundant in the Cubs system. The Cubs stockpile up the middle minor leaguers for trade. It's a smart strategy because they have the highest value relative to their signing.

 

Garza is also outside the injury nexus and should improve facing NL batters who hit in the 8th and 9th spot.

 

The difference between Garza and Greinke is not worth the extra $30 million and uncertainty of the Wrigley microscope. Greinke (justifiably) hates playing the media game. He won't have to answer the same question 15 times after every start in Milwaukee.

 

My main complaint is that an offensive upgrade should be the highest priority. Failing that, there were no pitchers of Garza's caliber that were cost effective on the market. It's Garza for 3/24 or Westbrook for 2/24 (plus Archer and Lee).

 

Nice post

[ctcf]

This trade is justified if Archer becomes a shutdown reliever.

 

Garza is better than Clement and Lilly when they joined the Blue fold.

 

Everyone involved in the trade besides Archer was redundant in the Cubs system. The Cubs stockpile up the middle minor leaguers for trade. It's a smart strategy because they have the highest value relative to their signing.

 

Garza is also outside the injury nexus and should improve facing NL batters who hit in the 8th and 9th spot.

 

The difference between Garza and Greinke is not worth the extra $30 million and uncertainty of the Wrigley microscope. Greinke (justifiably) hates playing the media game. He won't have to answer the same question 15 times after every start in Milwaukee.

 

My main complaint is that an offensive upgrade should be the highest priority. Failing that, there were no pitchers of Garza's caliber that were cost effective on the market. It's Garza for 3/24 or Westbrook for 2/24 (plus Archer and Lee).

 

I don't think it's fair to call Lee "redundant". Had he stayed and panned out he would quite conceivably have moved Castro to second in a few seasons.

 

True. The only question becomes is whether the 2012 Cubs 2B provides more value than Garza. Time will tell.

 

I agree which is why I said only time will tell on this one, although that is especially true of trades where one side is exclusively prospects.

[BCVM22]

Has anyone heard anything about a press conference this week? Edited January 10, 2011 by BCVM22

[CubsWin]

Has anything heard anything about a press conference this week?

I resent being called a "thing" and no, as far as Google can tell me nothing has been announced about a press conference this week.

[BCVM22]

Oops.

 

That's why you should never type faster than you can think, kids.

[David]

 

I'm not saying it's right or wrong. I'm just saying I see where he comes from. The last couple of times I remember him pulling one out of his arse like that were Mark DeRosa and Michael Barrett. Here's to hoping it turns out like those did. Matt Clement was another guy who he got and developed. Hendry's pretty good at targeting guys who haven't played up to their "scouting" ability and watched them mature into it. It's one of his saving graces as a GM.

 

 

Aramis and Lee also come to mind.