Re: What would you deal Garza for?

[Guest]

I don't know if the Dodgers have what I think would be enough for Garza.

 

agreed.

 

Same.

[erik316wttn]

I don't know if the Dodgers have what I think would be enough for Garza.

 

Kemp.

[El Duderino]

I don't know if the Dodgers have what I think would be enough for Garza.

 

Kemp.

 

touché

[davell]

the Dodgers have more than enough for Garza. Eovaldi, Lee, Rubby, Webster, Reed, Gould. Any 2 of the first 3 I named and any 1 of the next group is an excellent return.

[Guest]

the Dodgers have more than enough for Garza. Eovaldi, Lee, Rubby, Webster, Reed, Gould. Any 2 of the first 3 I named and any 1 of the next group is an excellent return.

 

I just can't get excited about Lee if he's working in the high 80's/low 90's.

[Rob]

What's Cesar Izturis up to?

[illiniguy]

I love how, if the Delgado Demp trade is done, we sat the market for ourselves. Oh and we sat it very high.

[Have a seat, Neifi]

I could see Garza for Lee AND Eovaldi, potentially. In that situation I'd guess we might have to throw them something else, but I'd guess the any deal with the Dodgers involving Garza would also have to involve at least 2 of Lee / Eovaldi / Rubby.

[minnesotacubsfan]

I love how, if the Delgado Demp trade is done, we sat the market for ourselves. Oh and we sat it very high.

 

 

set

[Guest]

I could see Garza for Lee AND Eovaldi, potentially. In that situation I'd guess we might have to throw them something else, but I'd guess the any deal with the Dodgers involving Garza would also have to involve at least 2 of Lee / Eovaldi / Rubby.

Jeff Baker

 

***ducks***

 

Really, I'd like to see them trade Vitters while is value is high and get as much quality as they could. Then I'd immediately move Baez to 3rd in MiLB

[rawaction]

I could see Garza for Lee AND Eovaldi, potentially. In that situation I'd guess we might have to throw them something else, but I'd guess the any deal with the Dodgers involving Garza would also have to involve at least 2 of Lee / Eovaldi / Rubby.

 

If you get Lee and Eovaldi for Garza, it could set up pretty nicely for an off-season trade of Eovaldi for Olt. Ever since Olt was mentioned, I've played out various scenarios in my head where the Cubs have him on their roster.

[Cubswin11]

I could see Garza for Lee AND Eovaldi, potentially. In that situation I'd guess we might have to throw them something else, but I'd guess the any deal with the Dodgers involving Garza would also have to involve at least 2 of Lee / Eovaldi / Rubby.

Jeff Baker

 

***ducks***

 

Really, I'd like to see them trade Vitters while is value is high and get as much quality as they could. Then I'd immediately move Baez to 3rd in MiLB

That's dumb

[Guest]

I could see Garza for Lee AND Eovaldi, potentially. In that situation I'd guess we might have to throw them something else, but I'd guess the any deal with the Dodgers involving Garza would also have to involve at least 2 of Lee / Eovaldi / Rubby.

Jeff Baker

 

***ducks***

 

Really, I'd like to see them trade Vitters while is value is high and get as much quality as they could. Then I'd immediately move Baez to 3rd in MiLB

That's dumb

Why?

[El Duderino]

because it's dumb to move baez to third right now

[dew1679666265]

Really, I'd like to see them trade Vitters while is value is high and get as much quality as they could. Then I'd immediately move Baez to 3rd in MiLB

 

I'd keep Baez at SS as long as possible in the offhand chance he figures out a way to stick there. And I wouldn't package Garza and Vitters together unless I was getting something ridiculous back.

[Guest]

because it's dumb to move baez to third right now

Well that explains it. Most scouts don't think Baez is going to be playing SS when he reaches MLB.

[dew1679666265]

because it's dumb to move baez to third right now

Well that explains it. Most scouts don't think Baez is going to be playing SS when he reaches MLB.

 

That doesn't mean he won't. No reason to give up on the hope this soon.

[Guest]

I could see Garza for Lee AND Eovaldi, potentially. In that situation I'd guess we might have to throw them something else, but I'd guess the any deal with the Dodgers involving Garza would also have to involve at least 2 of Lee / Eovaldi / Rubby.

Jeff Baker

 

***ducks***

 

Really, I'd like to see them trade Vitters while is value is high and get as much quality as they could. Then I'd immediately move Baez to 3rd in MiLB

 

There's no reason to move Baez to third base right now. He's got a good chance to stick at SS.

[scarey]

because it's dumb to move baez to third right now

Well that explains it. Most scouts don't think Baez is going to be playing SS when he reaches MLB.

 

I'm obviously no expert, but he looked great at SS when I saw him on Saturday. Maybe he doesn't make it to the big leagues as a shortstop, but he's too good to give up on him yet.

[Guest]

because it's dumb to move baez to third right now

Well that explains it. Most scouts don't think Baez is going to be playing SS when he reaches MLB.

 

More scouts seem to be thinking he can stick at shortstop after seeing him play this year in the MWL.

[Cubswin11]

I could see Garza for Lee AND Eovaldi, potentially. In that situation I'd guess we might have to throw them something else, but I'd guess the any deal with the Dodgers involving Garza would also have to involve at least 2 of Lee / Eovaldi / Rubby.

Jeff Baker

 

***ducks***

 

Really, I'd like to see them trade Vitters while is value is high and get as much quality as they could. Then I'd immediately move Baez to 3rd in MiLB

That's dumb

Why?

Because Baez has the most value if he sticks at SS. You don't move him off of SS until he either grows out of the position, proves he can't become an adequate fielder or once he's ready to come up the org. feels better about keeping Starlin at SS and moving Baez elsewhere. Baez hasn't done anything yet to prove he can/can't play SS long term and as long as he isn't completely butchering it out there right now he's worth keeping at that position (especially since he's a way off from MLB and in A ball).

 

And I doubt Vitters value is that high right now where he will help net us a significantly better prospect in a trade that he'd be worth trading. He's still young and his value to us right now is to keep him in the system and see if he can become the starting 3B sometime in the next 2 years (as he's showing some good progress this year and is younger for AAA but still needs some seasoning). I also doubt the Dodgers value him all that high as they need 3B help at the ML level right now and have a legit chance of making the playoffs Vitters is still a year off +/-.

Edited July 23, 2012 by Cubswin11

[Guest]

because it's dumb to move baez to third right now

Well that explains it. Most scouts don't think Baez is going to be playing SS when he reaches MLB.

 

Even if scouts weren't changing their minds on that, why would you rush that decision when it doesn't need to be rushed and provides no benefit?

[CubColtPacer]

because it's dumb to move baez to third right now

Well that explains it. Most scouts don't think Baez is going to be playing SS when he reaches MLB.

 

Even if scouts weren't changing their minds on that, why would you rush that decision when it doesn't need to be rushed and provides no benefit?

 

It does some provide some benefit to start learning the position earlier. But as one of the writers said recently, a SS/3B transition is one of the easier ones for a player to make. And the benefits of sticking at SS are so much more valuable than 3rd that you really shouldn't move a player until the chances are a lot lower than Baez's of sticking there.

[Guest]

because it's dumb to move baez to third right now

Well that explains it. Most scouts don't think Baez is going to be playing SS when he reaches MLB.

 

Even if scouts weren't changing their minds on that, why would you rush that decision when it doesn't need to be rushed and provides no benefit?

 

It does some provide some benefit to start learning the position earlier. But as one of the writers said recently, a SS/3B transition is one of the easier ones for a player to make. And the benefits of sticking at SS are so much more valuable than 3rd that you really shouldn't move a player until the chances are a lot lower than Baez's of sticking there.

 

Hence my belief that it provides no benefit.

[Have a seat, Neifi]

I could see Garza for Lee AND Eovaldi, potentially. In that situation I'd guess we might have to throw them something else, but I'd guess the any deal with the Dodgers involving Garza would also have to involve at least 2 of Lee / Eovaldi / Rubby.

Jeff Baker

 

***ducks***

 

Really, I'd like to see them trade Vitters while is value is high and get as much quality as they could. Then I'd immediately move Baez to 3rd in MiLB

I don't think Jeff Baker as a throw-in in a Garza for 2 of Lee/Eovaldi/Rubby is that ridiculous; the Dodgers still need bats, especially in the infield.

 

I wouldn't include Vitters in any package with Garza, unless it is to get an uber prospect who could conceivably step right in at 3B (e.g., Mike Olt). There's no reason to give him up to the Dodgers though, both because I don't think it's necessary and because Vitters' value as a prospect probably isn't as high as it will/could be this winter.