Re: What would you deal Garza for?

[TruffleShuffle]

what was so bad about the zambrano deal? he clearly had very little value. volstad sucks. zambrano has been pretty bad too (92 era+, career high walk rate, career high LD%, almost a career low K rate).

[davell]

These guys wanted to maximize what few assets we have that are tradable. With that, comes risk, if you're holding out for a larger package. I love our FO, but the risk factor has blown up in their faces here. Dempster? Our guys did a great job with him and he screwed us basically. But Garza? Probably should have been dealt this past offseason.No clue what was on the table, but it's definitely better than what's going to be at this point or in the offseason.

[Guest]

One of the biggest responsibilities of a front office of a bad team is to acquire potential talent in exchange for current assets not in the long term plans. As of now, the bottomline is that this front office has botched that pivotal job duty. Is it "bad luck" that Garza suffered an injury before the trade deadline? Maybe, but it also should be an always understood and acknowledged risk and possibility that should be considered and weighed as to the timing of pulling off a trade.

 

This is ridiculous.

Exactly.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

These guys wanted to maximize what few assets we have that are tradable. With that, comes risk, if you're holding out for a larger package. I love our FO, but the risk factor has blown up in their faces here. Dempster? Our guys did a great job with him and he screwed us basically. But Garza? Probably should have been dealt this past offseason.No clue what was on the table, but it's definitely better than what's going to be at this point or in the offseason.

 

They gambled and appear to have lost. I'm not willing or qualified to say whether it was a good gamble or not.

[Elrhino]

what was so bad about the zambrano deal? he clearly had very little value.

 

Insisting that he absolutely had to be sold at a time when he clearly had very little value, for starters.

[Little Slide Rooter]

what was so bad about the zambrano deal? he clearly had very little value.

 

Insisting that he absolutely had to be sold at a time when he clearly had very little value, for starters.

 

It's hard to argue with that. I doubt that his value could have possibly gone any lower than it was when we traded him.

[KingCubsFan]

what was so bad about the zambrano deal? he clearly had very little value.

 

Insisting that he absolutely had to be sold at a time when he clearly had very little value, for starters.

 

It's hard to argue with that. I doubt that his value could have possibly gone any lower than it was when we traded him.

Zambrano had no value then, and he has no value now. I haven't heard any rumors on Zambrano. Have you?

[SouthSideRyan]

Theo is probably slamming the bottle of Jack in desk pretty hard right now. Seems like no moves are going to happen before the deadline with how everything is going.

 

"[expletive], WHY AM I STUCK WITH THIS TALENTED PITCHER?!?! OH, WOE IS ME."

Are you really that clueless or just trolling? Who the [expletive] cares how talented is. A. He's not going to be around when this teams competitive. B. This team needs to be building for the future and acquiring as much young talent as it can. It's not rocket science. We need to turn him into multiple talented pitchers that will be around for when we are competitive, that's what I think most of us would prefer.

 

MATT GARZA IS YOUNG TALENT

[mookie]

He is youngish talent. He is not young cost controlled talent.

[SouthSideRyan]

Theo is probably slamming the bottle of Jack in desk pretty hard right now. Seems like no moves are going to happen before the deadline with how everything is going.

 

"[expletive], WHY AM I STUCK WITH THIS TALENTED PITCHER?!?! OH, WOE IS ME."

Are you really that clueless or just trolling? Who the [expletive] cares how talented is. A. He's not going to be around when this teams competitive. B. This team needs to be building for the future and acquiring as much young talent as it can. It's not rocket science. We need to turn him into multiple talented pitchers that will be around for when we are competitive, that's what I think most of us would prefer.

 

It's impossible a 28-year-old pitcher will be around when they're next competitive? Don't be ridiculous.

 

Management has given every indication they weren't planning on having him around.

 

Every indication, including talking an extension with him?

[davell]

Phil Rogers may have brought up his first good point ever just now. If Garza's MRI is clean, as it's said to have been, a team could still trade for him and put him through the physical, if something shows up, then they can back out. Which means a team probably would need to trade for him and get this done soon, giving them 48 hours or so to go in another direction, if they need to.

[mookie]

 

Management has given every indication they weren't planning on having him around.

 

Every indication, including talking an extension with him?

 

That felt more like positioning than a plausible and likely scenario.

[jersey cubs fan]

Every indication, including talking an extension with him?

 

From what I've read it didn't sound like that went very far at all. It seemed to be more of a show the trading partners he won't be easy to get gesture more than a real effort. I could be interpreting it wrong, but I think management has doubts about what Garza will bring to the table the next 6 years and would strongly prefer the prospect haul over his pitching value.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Every indication, including talking an extension with him?

 

I thought the reports were that they hadn't seriously talked an extension with him in quite some time.

[jersey cubs fan]

Phil Rogers may have brought up his first good point ever just now. If Garza's MRI is clean, as it's said to have been, a team could still trade for him and put him through the physical, if something shows up, then they can back out. Which means a team probably would need to trade for him and get this done soon, giving them 48 hours or so to go in another direction, if they need to.

 

He's hardly the first person to bring that up.

[Clem Fandango]

Phil Rogers may have brought up his first good point ever just now. If Garza's MRI is clean, as it's said to have been, a team could still trade for him and put him through the physical, if something shows up, then they can back out. Which means a team probably would need to trade for him and get this done soon, giving them 48 hours or so to go in another direction, if they need to.

 

He's hardly the first person to bring that up.

 

If it took Phil Rogers this long to figure that out he's a doofus. (No surprise there)

[The Post]

Contrary to reports, I believe Garza will make his next start. Why? The Dodgers hold all the cards in a Dumpster trade and have said that they prefer Garza. So Theo uses the minor injury to Garza to say he will not be traded until next off season, virtually taking him off the table. There is now one less pitcher available for the Dodgers to go after which ups Dumpster's value a tad. Now, the Dodgers are pressured into upping the ante or taking on Soriano. After Dumpster is traded to Dodgers for at the very least, Webster, in the next day or two, it comes out that Garza will make his next start. Theo, being pissed at how confident the Dodgers were, turns around and gives Coletti the bird and a big F**K you! Garza has a decent start and is then traded.

 

Wishful thinking but it would be pretty sweet.

[Tyrant]

Contrary to reports, I believe Garza will make his next start. Why? The Dodgers hold all the cards in a Dumpster trade and have said that they prefer Garza. So Theo uses the minor injury to Garza to say he will not be traded until next off season, virtually taking him off the table. There is now one less pitcher available for the Dodgers to go after which ups Dumpster's value a tad. Now, the Dodgers are pressured into upping the ante or taking on Soriano. After Dumpster is traded to Dodgers for at the very least, Webster, in the next day or two, it comes out that Garza will make his next start. Theo, being pissed at how confident the Dodgers were, turns around and gives Coletti the bird and a big F**K you! Garza has a decent start and is then traded.

 

Wishful thinking but it would be pretty sweet.

 

Sometimes things are just things.

[The Post]

Contrary to reports, I believe Garza will make his next start. Why? The Dodgers hold all the cards in a Dumpster trade and have said that they prefer Garza. So Theo uses the minor injury to Garza to say he will not be traded until next off season, virtually taking him off the table. There is now one less pitcher available for the Dodgers to go after which ups Dumpster's value a tad. Now, the Dodgers are pressured into upping the ante or taking on Soriano. After Dumpster is traded to Dodgers for at the very least, Webster, in the next day or two, it comes out that Garza will make his next start. Theo, being pissed at how confident the Dodgers were, turns around and gives Coletti the bird and a big F**K you! Garza has a decent start and is then traded.

 

Wishful thinking but it would be pretty sweet.

 

Sometimes things are just things.

 

And sometimes, contrary to 90% of the posters in this forum, it's fun to be positive and hopeful!

[mookie]

Okay. I will stick with reality though.

[Elrhino]

what was so bad about the zambrano deal? he clearly had very little value.

 

Insisting that he absolutely had to be sold at a time when he clearly had very little value, for starters.

 

It's hard to argue with that. I doubt that his value could have possibly gone any lower than it was when we traded him.

Zambrano had no value then, and he has no value now. I haven't heard any rumors on Zambrano. Have you?

 

Why would the Marlins trade him? They're getting 200 innings of an average starting pitcher for pennies.

[Guest]

what was so bad about the zambrano deal? he clearly had very little value.

 

Insisting that he absolutely had to be sold at a time when he clearly had very little value, for starters.

 

It's hard to argue with that. I doubt that his value could have possibly gone any lower than it was when we traded him.

Zambrano had no value then, and he has no value now. I haven't heard any rumors on Zambrano. Have you?

 

Why would the Marlins trade him? They're getting 200 innings of an average starting pitcher for pennies.

 

Average, eh?

[CubColtPacer]

what was so bad about the zambrano deal? he clearly had very little value.

 

Insisting that he absolutely had to be sold at a time when he clearly had very little value, for starters.

 

It's hard to argue with that. I doubt that his value could have possibly gone any lower than it was when we traded him.

Zambrano had no value then, and he has no value now. I haven't heard any rumors on Zambrano. Have you?

 

Why would the Marlins trade him? They're getting 200 innings of an average starting pitcher for pennies.

 

Zambrano hasn't been average though. Well below average ERA+, and his peripherals are even worse. Fangraphs lists 101 qualified starters right now. Z is 77th in ERA, 91st in FIP, and 98th in xFIP. Over halfway through the season, BR has him at 0.7 WAR and Fangraphs has him at 0.6.

[pitchcs]

what was so bad about the zambrano deal? he clearly had very little value.

 

Insisting that he absolutely had to be sold at a time when he clearly had very little value, for starters.

 

It's hard to argue with that. I doubt that his value could have possibly gone any lower than it was when we traded him.

Zambrano had no value then, and he has no value now. I haven't heard any rumors on Zambrano. Have you?

 

Why would the Marlins trade him? They're getting 200 innings of an average starting pitcher for pennies.

 

LMAO, 79 K/63 BB

[The Post]

Okay. I will stick with reality though.

 

Reality is never as much fun!