Re: What would you deal Garza for?

[mookie]

That's Nolan Ryan's motto.

[jersey cubs fan]

Getting into the playoffs is all it takes but there is a difference between being a team that might contend for the playoffs and a team that is nearly a lock to make them. Call it whatever you want, they aren't the same.

[Guest]

Getting into the playoffs is all it takes but there is a difference between being a team that might contend for the playoffs and a team that is nearly a lock to make them. Call it whatever you want, they aren't the same.

 

Certainly, but that still really just depends on your competition for the playoff spot itself, and not the competition in the playoffs.

 

You can dominate your division without really having to be the best team in the league...and this is a division where, going forward, that's a possibility.

[Rizzo Smash]

If we're planning on going for it sooner rather than later by signing a Cole Hamels then of course you keep Garza. A pitching rotation with Hamels, Garza, and Good Shark is pretty nasty going forward. Still don't see a true #1 there, maybe it's Hamels?

[SCCubbieFAN]

My current top 3 choices from teams that I think would be interested in giving up a good amount for Garza.

 

Toronto - 2 of: Syndergaard, Nicolino, Marisnick as the centerpiece.

Boston - Barnes and Owens as the centerpiece.

Marlins - Fernandez and Yellich as the centerpiece.

 

 

It's asking a lot though. I'm not sure if any of those teams go for it.

 

Arizona could be a very good option too. Phillies (May, Biddle, Dom Brown )? I'd want Mason Williams and Campos to lead a trade from the Yankees. I'm still fairly confident Theo/Jed will be able to find a nice deal at the deadline if they aren't going to extend Garza.

 

I'd want Jackie Bradley or Xander from the Red Sox.

 

Bradley Jr. is my type of hitter...Really studies the stuff too:

 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/qa-jackie-bradley-jr-bosox-blueprint/

 

One of the better interviews you'll see from a young player, or maybe any player.

 

I would love to see JBJ patroling an OF spot for the Cubs some day. He was a special player at SC and a class act person. And my daughter has his autograph! :D

[SouthSideRyan]

If we're planning on going for it sooner rather than later by signing a Cole Hamels then of course you keep Garza. A pitching rotation with Hamels, Garza, and Good Shark is pretty nasty going forward. Still don't see a true #1 there, maybe it's Hamels?

 

More like a 1.7

[Guest]

That rotation would have two of the top 20 pitchers in baseball from last year(who are both off to similar starts this year), it's fine at the top no matter what labels you want to attach to it.

[Rizzo Smash]

If we're planning on going for it sooner rather than later by signing a Cole Hamels then of course you keep Garza. A pitching rotation with Hamels, Garza, and Good Shark is pretty nasty going forward. Still don't see a true #1 there, maybe it's Hamels?

 

More like a 1.7

Yeah I mean the thing is, we lack an ace and the question is, how do you find an ace? You don't see aces show up in the free agent market too often and we really don't have the minor league talent to trade for one so we're going to have to draft one. Maybe we find one in this year's draft when we pick 6th or maybe next year when we pick top 10?

[Tracer Bullet]

Why do we need an "ace" when we have (in this hypo) 2 of the 20 best pitchers in baseball?

[bukie]

There can only ever be one "true" #1 starter, because anyone else would be a #2 in that pitcher's rotation.

[mookie]

As much as I would love an ace, I agree. Not every team has one, not even close. Plus, you don't have to have one to win the whole damn thing. A solid rotation with at least a few power pitchers will do the trick. Oh and defense, defense, defense. I think Theo understands this, but Detroit definitely has a stupid blind spot on pretty much both counts.

[jersey cubs fan]

You can dominate your division without really having to be the best team in the league...and this is a division where, going forward, that's a possibility.

 

Theoretically, sure.

 

But you probably won't dominate for long without actually being pretty damn good. The Cubs should have a goal of regularly winning 95 games, not every year of course, but they shouldn't be thinking about trying to be a team that can contend within a weak division or maybe making it into the playoffs on the 2nd wild card. Plus, being a wild card isn't going to be nearly as favorable as it has in the past.

[SouthSideRyan]

You can dominate your division without really having to be the best team in the league...and this is a division where, going forward, that's a possibility.

 

Theoretically, sure.

 

But you probably won't dominate for long without actually being pretty damn good. The Cubs should have a goal of regularly winning 95 games, not every year of course, but they shouldn't be thinking about trying to be a team that can contend within a weak division or maybe making it into the playoffs on the 2nd wild card. Plus, being a wild card isn't going to be nearly as favorable as it has in the past.

 

They haven't given any indication that that's their plan.

[jersey cubs fan]

You can dominate your division without really having to be the best team in the league...and this is a division where, going forward, that's a possibility.

 

Theoretically, sure.

 

But you probably won't dominate for long without actually being pretty damn good. The Cubs should have a goal of regularly winning 95 games, not every year of course, but they shouldn't be thinking about trying to be a team that can contend within a weak division or maybe making it into the playoffs on the 2nd wild card. Plus, being a wild card isn't going to be nearly as favorable as it has in the past.

 

They haven't given any indication that that's their plan.

 

I'm not suggesting they have. But people talking about the crapshoot (poor description) of the playoffs and how all that matters is getting in are forgetting about the change in system going forward.

 

There's value in being the #1 seed.

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

If we're planning on going for it sooner rather than later by signing a Cole Hamels then of course you keep Garza. A pitching rotation with Hamels, Garza, and Good Shark is pretty nasty going forward. Still don't see a true #1 there, maybe it's Hamels?

 

1) 4 aces in every deck.

 

2) Almost made this same exact post minus the #1 part...actually damn I didn't play that game as well...it's a bs game....but yeah including calling him "Good Shark."

 

I really want Hamels here. Young, left handed, gets K's, a high end pitchers for years, great pedigree...

[SouthSideRyan]

You can dominate your division without really having to be the best team in the league...and this is a division where, going forward, that's a possibility.

 

Theoretically, sure.

 

But you probably won't dominate for long without actually being pretty damn good. The Cubs should have a goal of regularly winning 95 games, not every year of course, but they shouldn't be thinking about trying to be a team that can contend within a weak division or maybe making it into the playoffs on the 2nd wild card. Plus, being a wild card isn't going to be nearly as favorable as it has in the past.

 

They haven't given any indication that that's their plan.

 

I'm not suggesting they have. But people talking about the crapshoot (poor description) of the playoffs and how all that matters is getting in are forgetting about the change in system going forward.

 

There's value in being the #1 seed.

 

The whole point of the conversation was a comment about how Garza shouldn't be retained because by the time the Cubs can win the world series it'll be 6 years from now.

[jersey cubs fan]

The whole point of the conversation was a comment about how Garza shouldn't be retained because by the time the Cubs can win the world series it'll be 6 years from now.

 

And then quickly morphed into an "everybody is too dumb to realize how the playoffs work" discussion.

[abuck1220]

If we're planning on going for it sooner rather than later by signing a Cole Hamels then of course you keep Garza. A pitching rotation with Hamels, Garza, and Good Shark is pretty nasty going forward. Still don't see a true #1 there, maybe it's Hamels?

 

hamels is a hell of a lot closer to a #1 than samardzija is to a #3, that's for damn sure.

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

If we're planning on going for it sooner rather than later by signing a Cole Hamels then of course you keep Garza. A pitching rotation with Hamels, Garza, and Good Shark is pretty nasty going forward. Still don't see a true #1 there, maybe it's Hamels?

 

hamels is a hell of a lot closer to a #1 than samardzija is to a #3, that's for damn sure.

 

Yeah but imagine!

[Backtobanks]

From MLBTR:

 

•Tigers starters other than Justin Verlander and Drew Smyly have struggled so far this year, and rival executives expect Detroit to make a strong push for rotation help by the July trade deadline.

[Little Slide Rooter]

From MLBTR:

 

•Tigers starters other than Justin Verlander and Drew Smyly have struggled so far this year, and rival executives expect Detroit to make a strong push for rotation help by the July trade deadline.

 

Hopefully Dempster's nice and healthy by then.

[mookie]

From MLBTR:

 

•Tigers starters other than Justin Verlander and Drew Smyly have struggled so far this year, and rival executives expect Detroit to make a strong push for rotation help by the July trade deadline.

 

Hopefully Dempster's nice and healthy by then.

 

Garza to Detroit makes a ton of sense, which is probably why it won't happen.

[Guest]

From MLBTR:

 

•Tigers starters other than Justin Verlander and Drew Smyly have struggled so far this year, and rival executives expect Detroit to make a strong push for rotation help by the July trade deadline.

 

Hopefully Dempster's nice and healthy by then.

 

Garza to Detroit makes a ton of sense, which is probably why it won't happen.

 

No it doesn't. They don't have anything worth giving him up for, especially with Turner's shoulder issues.

 

 

Now, if they want to toss us something of value for Dempster, sure.

[A New Era]

Yeah Detroit screwed themselves. If they wanted Garza for Turner + they should have given him up before the season. Now that Garza has been pitching like an Ace, it's gonna take some teams top 4 prospects, but from a top farm system.

[mookie]

From MLBTR:

 

•Tigers starters other than Justin Verlander and Drew Smyly have struggled so far this year, and rival executives expect Detroit to make a strong push for rotation help by the July trade deadline.

 

Hopefully Dempster's nice and healthy by then.

 

Garza to Detroit makes a ton of sense, which is probably why it won't happen.

 

No it doesn't. They don't have anything worth giving him up for, especially with Turner's shoulder issues.

 

 

Now, if they want to toss us something of value for Dempster, sure.

 

I think Turner is okay now, no? Besides, a package of Turner and Nick Castellanos would be dreamy. And it does, from Detroit's perspective, make a ton of sense. I am not saying Garza would be able to net that package, but we will see. I would really rather trade with Texas or Toronto, but Garza will only give the team 1 and a half years of service time, so asking for their four top prospects is a little crazy town.