Re: What would you deal Garza for?

[17 Seconds]

5 years? I'm loving the optimism this board has been showing about us contending next year even. I can't wait to see what this board becomes when Rizzo and Brett come up and play well.

 

I know what I'm going to say. They both K too much.

 

rizzo strikes out too much?

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

5 years? I'm loving the optimism this board has been showing about us contending next year even. I can't wait to see what this board becomes when Rizzo and Brett come up and play well.

 

I know what I'm going to say. They both K too much.

 

rizzo strikes out too much?

 

Not crazy like Jackson but 132 in AA during his last full season in the minors. Hell even 89 in 356 ABs last year isn't all that great.

 

I'm not actually overly worried about either, but have to keep 'em on their toes?

[mookie]

Everyone's favorite name a few months ago, Jacob Turner, was just promoted to AAA. Looks like he is about to smell some rotation time. I think the Tigers have to try the kid out soon or make a deal.

[El Duderino]

I don't see why they need to promote him barring injury. Dude is only about to turn 21.

[davell]

According to Rosenthal, extension talks are going "very well".

[toonsterwu]

Wanted to voice a few thoughts that somewhat tie in with Garza

 

1. There definitely have been moments, however brief, this year where I've wondered where this team would be with ... say Aramis Ramirez and Andrew Cashner. That said, I thought the decision to rebuild was fine last year, and I still think it's fine.

 

2. I once said that I thought Garza pitching well would make a Garza decision that much tougher. What I didn't anticipate, and really, who did, was Samardzija pitching so well. It's too early to make a long-term determination on Samardzija's long term capabilities as a starter, but it could definitely impact the Garza decision this summer

 

a) On the one hand, if Samardzija is pitching well, a Garza/Shark tandem, plus a mid-rotation arm and, say Dempster, could be a very good rotation. It would give the Cubs a lot of flexibility to pursue bats first, rather than chasing at the top tier arms. You'd still have Maholm as a possible candidate to shop this summer. Heck, to be honest, if Shark is pitching that well at mid-season, you could keep the same rotation and likely still have feel comfortable about the rotation entering 2013.

 

b) On the other hand, does Shark pitching well make it easier to deal Garza? Because the original calculus that a lot of us had was that we needed to add another TOR type arm to Garza. If Shark is pitching like TOR starter, maybe they feel that it's money in the bank and they should stock up on young talent with a Garza trade.

 

c) I doubt it, but I don't think there's been that much discussion on whether or not Shark should be traded if he's pitching well this summer. Yet, why not? If part of the math on Garza is that he might be at the end of his prime when we're ready to be title contenders, well, Shark is only a year and change younger, and would likely bring in a stellar package if he's still dominating this summer.

 

_____

 

A lot really depends on whatever internal roadmap the FO has on their board in regards to when they can compete. When I look at the combination of the age of our SP's now and where our young talent is in their development, I often question the timing of things. Maybe we get lucky, and Jackson/Rizzo both pan out, with a surprise from say, Cardenas or Valbuena becoming a solid regular. The chances are still high, though, that all three might not reach the ceilings that are hoped for, and if that's the case, can the Cubs find enough offense in FA? Because it's hard to imagine the Cubs being able to complete a big trade, assuming Rizzo/Jackson are off limits, unless they put in Baez and some other top chips, guys we are all hoping on.

 

I started off about 50/50 on dealing Garza, but with the way Garza is throwing this year, and the number of teams needing quality starters (if Baltimore stays in it, that's a team that could use an elite starter ... granted, they could use another bat as well), it's hard to imagine that we can't get a very quality package for him, and I think I'm leaning more towards dealing Garza as of now.

 

So, to actually have a comment that ties in with the thread title, if Garza keeps dominating similar to what he's done so far this year, I think you have to right to demand 2 quality upper level prospects (or a legitimately elite chip) in a package, and at least a full season lottery ticket in the A ball ranks. Maybe that's shooting for the moon, but there's so few dominant pitchers available, if Garza keeps dominating, I see no reason why we shouldn't ask for that. That's obviously not locked in stone (I wouldn't say no to quality A+ guys, but the rest of the package would have to be better).

[davell]

Shark may be 27, but his arm isn't. I think his lack of arm mileage is a gigantic reason to extend him if we are comfortable he is legit. With the amount of cash we should have available, even if we keep Garza and Shark is legit, I want another TOR starter to go with those 2. There would still be money to address hitting as well.

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

Shark may be 27, but his arm isn't. I think his lack of arm mileage is a gigantic reason to extend him if we are comfortable he is legit. With the amount of cash we should have available, even if we keep Garza and Shark is legit, I want another TOR starter to go with those 2. There would still be money to address hitting as well.

 

Pretty much...Trade Jeff S. would be madness this year.

[Guest]

1. There definitely have been moments, however brief, this year where I've wondered where this team would be with ... say Aramis Ramirez and Andrew Cashner. That said, I thought the decision to rebuild was fine last year, and I still think it's fine.

 

Aramis isn't hitting very well either (though still better than Stewart) so I doubt that would have made much of a difference.

 

Also, you mentioning Cashner prompted me to look up his stats. He's got a 3.68 ERA but a 1.705 WHIP. He's had no control as he's averaging 8 BB/9.

[toonsterwu]

1. There definitely have been moments, however brief, this year where I've wondered where this team would be with ... say Aramis Ramirez and Andrew Cashner. That said, I thought the decision to rebuild was fine last year, and I still think it's fine.

 

Aramis isn't hitting very well either (though still better than Stewart) so I doubt that would have made much of a difference.

 

Also, you mentioning Cashner prompted me to look up his stats. He's got a 3.68 ERA but a 1.705 WHIP. He's had no control as he's averaging 8 BB/9.

 

Sure, but that's assuming that they would've gotten off to similar starts here. Once you change one thing, you change everything.

 

That said, tis a hypothetical that has no meaning since it doesn't matter.

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

I dot think its possible for me to care less that Ramirez and Cashner are no longer Cubs.

[Guest]

1. There definitely have been moments, however brief, this year where I've wondered where this team would be with ... say Aramis Ramirez and Andrew Cashner. That said, I thought the decision to rebuild was fine last year, and I still think it's fine.

 

Aramis isn't hitting very well either (though still better than Stewart) so I doubt that would have made much of a difference.

 

Also, you mentioning Cashner prompted me to look up his stats. He's got a 3.68 ERA but a 1.705 WHIP. He's had no control as he's averaging 8 BB/9.

 

Sure, but that's assuming that they would've gotten off to similar starts here. Once you change one thing, you change everything.

 

That said, tis a hypothetical that has no meaning since it doesn't matter.

 

Yeah. If Aramis is here, Ian Stewart isn't, which means we either still have Colvin and LeMahieu or traded them for something else.

[toonsterwu]

Shark may be 27, but his arm isn't. I think his lack of arm mileage is a gigantic reason to extend him if we are comfortable he is legit. With the amount of cash we should have available, even if we keep Garza and Shark is legit, I want another TOR starter to go with those 2. There would still be money to address hitting as well.

 

So ... let's play this out. Again, just offering a viewpoint.

 

Shark is 27 right now. Let's say he has a longer than normal prime age-range on account of a lack of usage (and that's a debatable notion in some respects, but not the purpose here). Say, you believe that. He'll be in his age 28 year next year. You'll have your young chips up. For better or worse, we aren't going to go after 1st/CF in all likelihood. So, you'll look to add, what, a corner OF? The team still needs a top of the order bat, and as you note, we probably still need another arm in the rotation. It'd be stunning if we didn't add a pen arm or two this winter. Barring a wholesale spending spree, it's fair to say, IMO, that, the combination of youth at some positional spots and needing to overhaul the personnel will make it difficult for us to be, on paper, legitimate contenders entering 2013. In short, tough to see the "window" being open to start 2013.

 

He'll be age 29 in 2014. The team can spend, but at this point, we'd have to start anticipating some regression from Garza (if it hasn't happened already). Maybe he pulls it out another year, maybe not. I've said since this past winter that I thought 2014 was the most realistic year that our window would start. But ... the chances of being a contender in Year 1 of our window is debatable at this ridiculously early juncture (I acknowledge that this is really way too early to fathom a guess on things like that, but also note that teams have to do some sort of game-planning, if not directly like this, something similar, to understand where they might need to allocate resources). We'd need Rizzo/Jackson to be quality players, to have addressed our main needs, and to have the flexibility to perhaps add another arm if Garza shows some signs of regressing a bit. Considering the volatile nature of pen arms, it's not inconceivable that we might be needing another guy or two. Again, flukes can happen, but I think a lot would have to go right.

 

So, we're looking at his age 30 season in 2015. A lot of things have to go right for us to be an on-paper contender entering 2015, but let's assume they do. Even if you are generous in extending his prime-age range to suggest that he could say, last till 33-34 on his prime, it's still not many years left. Enough to justify an extension in 2012 or 2013 for say, 3-4 years? Probably (I doubt they'd give him a 5 or more year extension, but I could be wrong). But that would mean that we're looking at Shark in the final year or two of his deal by 2015.

 

Let's take a step back. Say, Samardzija is dominating. Dealing Garza and Samardzija could potentially net us a boatload of talent. Let's assume we get 2-3 key young pitchers to develop. You have these guys coming up with Rizzo/Jackson, on a similar timeline. Instead of having to spend to fill holes, the front office would be allowed the opportunity to search for critical pieces. It takes us back another year or two, but it might be worthwhile.

 

Look, I'm not saying deal Samardzija. I'm saying that I think all things should be on the table as we ponder the future. I'm very open to the idea that Shark gets an extension, even if he isn't dominating like he is right now, and is more of a mid-rotation arm. All this is discussion was predicated on what is still a big IF as of now - Samardzija dominating. But ... now that we are on a full-rebuild mode, I don't think we can assume that things will definitely go right, that we will land a key big bat, a key top of the order option, another arm, some bullpen help, and build a contender that fast. Not impossible, and I hope we can, but it's tough to imagine that the front office isn't playing all the scenarios out in their minds, as there are definitely examples of teams that went into rebuild that took a long time to find their balance, even with quality prospects (and some don't ever find it in the time they expect).

[Sammy Sofa]

Not impossible, and I hope we can, but it's tough to imagine that the front office isn't playing all the scenarios out in their minds, as there are definitely examples of teams that went into rebuild that took a long time to find their balance, even with quality prospects (and some don't ever find it in the time they expect).

 

Probably because they didn't have any established players they could build around.

[toonsterwu]

Not impossible, and I hope we can, but it's tough to imagine that the front office isn't playing all the scenarios out in their minds, as there are definitely examples of teams that went into rebuild that took a long time to find their balance, even with quality prospects (and some don't ever find it in the time they expect).

 

Probably because they didn't have any established players they could build around.

 

That's definitely true.

 

______

 

As an aside, if the Cubs give Garza an extension and hold onto Samardzija, a very likely scenario, then they better spend this off-season. One can understand the dynamics this year and the lack of support our starting pitching has often had, It's painful to look at a team batting line of .239/.302/.361 and the poor pen numbers, but it was understandable because it was a rebuilding year. If they keep both pitchers, then you can't waste their top years, so that means going out and finding one or two bats (depending on how things go, that said, ideally, one top of the order bat, one middle of the order bat) and some pen help. As noted earlier, I think you can live with the rotation as is and still feel okay with it (although ideally, you'd add someone to it).

[davell]

I think keeping Garza hinges on Shark continuing to progress, but also on whether or not LaHair looks like he's a true middle of the order bat, plus has the ability to be at least Dunn level in LF. If both those things are a go, one bat and one arm seems like what's needed for us to contend. Not counting pen help, which shouldn't be expensive for us anyway.

[PriortoTheoIhadWood]

1. There definitely have been moments, however brief, this year where I've wondered where this team would be with ... say Aramis Ramirez and Andrew Cashner. That said, I thought the decision to rebuild was fine last year, and I still think it's fine.

 

Aramis isn't hitting very well either (though still better than Stewart) so I doubt that would have made much of a difference.

 

Also, you mentioning Cashner prompted me to look up his stats. He's got a 3.68 ERA but a 1.705 WHIP. He's had no control as he's averaging 8 BB/9.

 

Sure, but that's assuming that they would've gotten off to similar starts here. Once you change one thing, you change everything.

 

That said, tis a hypothetical that has no meaning since it doesn't matter.

 

Yeah. If Aramis is here, Ian Stewart isn't, which means we either still have Colvin and LeMahieu or traded them for something else.

 

There was much truth in the LeMahieu.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

1. There definitely have been moments, however brief, this year where I've wondered where this team would be with ... say Aramis Ramirez and Andrew Cashner. That said, I thought the decision to rebuild was fine last year, and I still think it's fine.

 

Aramis isn't hitting very well either (though still better than Stewart) so I doubt that would have made much of a difference.

 

Also, you mentioning Cashner prompted me to look up his stats. He's got a 3.68 ERA but a 1.705 WHIP. He's had no control as he's averaging 8 BB/9.

 

Sure, but that's assuming that they would've gotten off to similar starts here. Once you change one thing, you change everything.

 

That said, tis a hypothetical that has no meaning since it doesn't matter.

 

I understand what you are saying, but A-Ram has gotten off to the same start the last two years as well. I think it could be assumed he'd have sucked so far for us, too.

[davell]

Heyman threw out Hughes and Banuelos for Garza a few minutes ago, off the top of his head. I'm not for this, but with another top 10ish type prospect from their system, I might would consider it.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Heyman threw out Hughes and Banuelos for Garza a few minutes ago, off the top of his head. I'm not for this, but with another top 10ish type prospect from their system, I might would consider it.

 

Is Austin Romine still considered that, or even an upgrade over Castillo? Maybe we could throw in Soto for that deal and them either trade Castillo or flip Romine. Maybe even Joba if the injury consternation and fact that he's an FA in 2014 aren't too much of a deterrence.

[davell]

No. Romine basically profiles as a backup at this point. Want no part of Joba or Betances for that matter

Maybe Samchez? Although he's probably not sticking at C himself. Looking at their system, I guess I'll pass. Don't see much I like, necause Williams ism't getting dealt

And I don't like their pitching at all.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Look, I'm not saying deal Samardzija. I'm saying that I think all things should be on the table as we ponder the future. I'm very open to the idea that Shark gets an extension, even if he isn't dominating like he is right now, and is more of a mid-rotation arm. All this is discussion was predicated on what is still a big IF as of now - Samardzija dominating. But ... now that we are on a full-rebuild mode, I don't think we can assume that things will definitely go right, that we will land a key big bat, a key top of the order option, another arm, some bullpen help, and build a contender that fast. Not impossible, and I hope we can, but it's tough to imagine that the front office isn't playing all the scenarios out in their minds, as there are definitely examples of teams that went into rebuild that took a long time to find their balance, even with quality prospects (and some don't ever find it in the time they expect).

 

Ugh. Not ugh to you for saying it, but ugh for the fact that there's some truth in it.

 

Once you go ahead and let your MLB team bottom out, it becomes really hard to break out of it and all kinds of inefficiencies emerge.

[Guest]

Look, I'm not saying deal Samardzija. I'm saying that I think all things should be on the table as we ponder the future. I'm very open to the idea that Shark gets an extension, even if he isn't dominating like he is right now, and is more of a mid-rotation arm. All this is discussion was predicated on what is still a big IF as of now - Samardzija dominating. But ... now that we are on a full-rebuild mode, I don't think we can assume that things will definitely go right, that we will land a key big bat, a key top of the order option, another arm, some bullpen help, and build a contender that fast. Not impossible, and I hope we can, but it's tough to imagine that the front office isn't playing all the scenarios out in their minds, as there are definitely examples of teams that went into rebuild that took a long time to find their balance, even with quality prospects (and some don't ever find it in the time they expect).

 

Ugh. Not ugh to you for saying it, but ugh for the fact that there's some truth in it.

 

Once you go ahead and let your MLB team bottom out, it becomes really hard to break out of it and all kinds of inefficiencies emerge.

 

Or you sign Alfonso Soriano, Ted Lilly, Mark DeRosa, and Jason Marquis and win 85 games (best team in baseball after June 1st, though, wasn't it?) and a crappy division.

 

Not trying to be a smart ass. Just saying it's not quite the same as being the Royals or Pirates.

[SouthSideRyan]

Heyman threw out Hughes and Banuelos for Garza a few minutes ago, off the top of his head. I'm not for this, but with another top 10ish type prospect from their system, I might would consider it.

 

What? Absolutely not.

 

ETA: And just saw Hughes is a free agent the same time as Garza. That is a hilariously bad deal.

[El Duderino]

Phil Hughes? LOL.