Re: What would you deal Garza for?

[davell]

I keep thinking of whether it's a good idea or not to trade him, but I think we can and still find a way to contend next season. Anyway, here are some potebtial targets, any of these hold any interest? To the Angels for Conger, Richards, and Segura. To Toronto for Snider, Drabek, and Arencibia. To the Nats for Cole, Norris, and Solis. To the Rangers for Perez, Olt, and Ramirez. To the Red Sox for Kalish, Middlebrooks, and Cecchini. To the Rockies for Arenado and Rosario. To Detroit for Porcello and Turner. To the Yanks for Sanchez, Banuelos, and Heathcott. Personally, I'd prefer finding a way to get some guys ready to go, but I can't see Texas trading Holland or Ogando. I'd love to get Montero from the Yanks, but I think he's probably an AL lifer. Anyway, if we deal him, my guess is it's to one of these teams.

None of those packages would make me excited about giving up on next season.

I don't think trading him means you have to give up on next season though. If you got Porcello and Turner for him(my personal favorite and I doubt it's possible) you could slide Porcello into the back end of the staff and hope he grows into much more. Then go out and sign Jackson for 3 and 36 or so and hope that he blossoms into what he's capable of as well. And you'd have added a future 1 or 2 for the future in Turner as well. Go ahead and sign Fielder, try for Cespedes, if you miss on him, go get a Kubel or something like that. Get your scrap heap 3rd baseman dujour, Ian Stewart, or trade for Headley or Encarnacion. And if you really want to make a run this year, try and get one of Cahill, Gio, or McCarthy for a package headlined by Szczur, McNutt, and Castillo. If that doesn't work, you could flip Turner as the main piece and maybe add Szczur? You'd have Prince at 1B, Stewart at 3B, probably Kubel in RF, with a staff of an Oakland guy, Jackson, Dempster, Zambrano, and Porcello. Lots of moves, but I think that team contends and makes us better for the future as well.

[Guest]

That's a whole lot of moves and I'm not sure we've benefitted that much unless you feel that Porcello is going to break out. We can do all the other moves and have Garza, OakGuy, Demp, Z, Wells/Shark/Cash. We wouldn't have Turner, but we'd be in a significantly better short term position.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I keep thinking of whether it's a good idea or not to trade him, but I think we can and still find a way to contend next season. Anyway, here are some potebtial targets, any of these hold any interest? To the Angels for Conger, Richards, and Segura. To Toronto for Snider, Drabek, and Arencibia. To the Nats for Cole, Norris, and Solis. To the Rangers for Perez, Olt, and Ramirez. To the Red Sox for Kalish, Middlebrooks, and Cecchini. To the Rockies for Arenado and Rosario. To Detroit for Porcello and Turner. To the Yanks for Sanchez, Banuelos, and Heathcott. Personally, I'd prefer finding a way to get some guys ready to go, but I can't see Texas trading Holland or Ogando. I'd love to get Montero from the Yanks, but I think he's probably an AL lifer. Anyway, if we deal him, my guess is it's to one of these teams.

None of those packages would make me excited about giving up on next season.

 

I actually very much like the Toronto package. Don't know how much they'd like it though. Maybe if we threw in Castillo to sweeten it up a bit. I know last year sucked for Drabek but he's still only 23.

[davell]

Goldstein was asked if Yonder Alonso could net them a top of the rotation guy and he responded by saying to get Shields, Gio, or Garza it'd probably take Alonso, Grandal, and 2 mid level guys. I don't want to deal him within the division, but if it's a comparable package from another team, I think I'd bite. That's a pretty solid return.

[toonsterwu]

That's pretty much what I think the cost of Garza should be as well (hence why I think a Rangers package almost has to include Profar to even get my attention). I don't mind dealing within the division, but the Reds simply don't have the arms to offer in return. If we move Garza, we'd have to get an arm, or two, in return. It doesn't need to be the centerpiece prospect to a deal, but the Reds are really lacking in arm talent right now. An over-hyped system, if you ask me.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Kansas City seems to be taking themselves for real, and why shouldn't they? There's really no long term threat in that division. Detroit looks like they can be very good for another 2 years, but that's about it. The Royals seem to have more top prospects and young players than they know what to do with, their main weakness being big league ready starting pitching, thus a 2 year deal for 47 year old junkballer Bruce Chen. I doubt we're getting any of their top 3, Myers, Odirizzi, or Montgomery, or Hosmer but perhaps something like Moutsakas, Lamb, and a few more prospects. Maybe work Luke Hoochever in the deal and see if a change of scenery does him good. Even something centered around Alex Gordon could be interesting.

 

Either A.

 

Royals

Garza

Flaherty

 

Cubs

Moutsakas

Lamb

Hoochevar

 

or B.

 

Royals

Garza

Byrd or Colvin: Colvin could hold them over a few years until Myers is ready, or they could extend Byrd to do the same.

Flaherty

 

 

Cubs

Gordon

Hoochevar

Lamb

 

In either scenerio, a few fringe prospects from one or both teams can go back and forth as well. Thing about the Royals is they have to get that window open quick before the top guys that end up panning out end up elsewhere.

[davearm2]

So this is what it has come to. The Royals are closer to contending than the Cubs.

[Little Slide Rooter]

So this is what it has come to. The Royals are closer to contending than the Cubs.

 

Yeah, but in the next 3-4 years hopefully the Cubs will be able to pilledge the Royals and The Royals will be the Royals again.

[toonsterwu]

WSR - I'll be honest, I don't really love either deal for us, and I don't think the Royals would do the former (the Moustakas deal). I'd really want a 2nd quality asset, and I guess the argument is that Hochevar is a proven major leaguer that is a solid rotation pitcher, but I don't believe he is more than a 4th starter, and we can find and spend on those.

[Little Slide Rooter]

WSR - I'll be honest, I don't really love either deal for us, and I don't think the Royals would do the former (the Moustakas deal). I'd really want a 2nd quality asset, and I guess the argument is that Hochevar is a proven major leaguer that is a solid rotation pitcher, but I don't believe he is more than a 4th starter, and we can find and spend on those.

 

The appeal with Hochevar is that he's one of those former golden boys who didn't live up to the hype but a change of scenery and/or coaching could pay off handsomely. Their main need is a front of the rotation pitcher(Garza), not that we dont need one. The difference is, we have the money to go out and get one next year and I doubt they can afford one of the big names if the hit FA. We need a big bat, which hopefully Gordon can be and we get a mid rotation starter in Hochever who could potentially be even better. We'd also get a top pitching prospect in Lamb and they'd fill the outfield hole left by Gordon with Byrd unless they prefer to roll the dice and take Colvin instead. We could also kick them Flaherty, who we likely lose through Rule 5 anyway as a useful supersub with a bit of power.

[JeffH]

WSR - I'll be honest, I don't really love either deal for us, and I don't think the Royals would do the former (the Moustakas deal). I'd really want a 2nd quality asset, and I guess the argument is that Hochevar is a proven major leaguer that is a solid rotation pitcher, but I don't believe he is more than a 4th starter, and we can find and spend on those.

 

The appeal with Hochevar is that he's one of those former golden boys who didn't live up to the hype but a change of scenery and/or coaching could pay off handsomely. Their main need is a front of the rotation pitcher(Garza), not that we dont need one. The difference is, we have the money to go out and get one next year and I doubt they can afford one of the big names if the hit FA. We need a big bat, which hopefully Gordon can be and we get a mid rotation starter in Hochever who could potentially be even better. We'd also get a top pitching prospect in Lamb and they'd fill the outfield hole left by Gordon with Byrd unless they prefer to roll the dice and take Colvin instead. We could also kick them Flaherty, who we likely lose through Rule 5 anyway as a useful supersub with a bit of power.

 

If Flaherty is going to be lost through Rule 5, why would the Royals want him?

[Little Slide Rooter]

WSR - I'll be honest, I don't really love either deal for us, and I don't think the Royals would do the former (the Moustakas deal). I'd really want a 2nd quality asset, and I guess the argument is that Hochevar is a proven major leaguer that is a solid rotation pitcher, but I don't believe he is more than a 4th starter, and we can find and spend on those.

 

The appeal with Hochevar is that he's one of those former golden boys who didn't live up to the hype but a change of scenery and/or coaching could pay off handsomely. Their main need is a front of the rotation pitcher(Garza), not that we dont need one. The difference is, we have the money to go out and get one next year and I doubt they can afford one of the big names if the hit FA. We need a big bat, which hopefully Gordon can be and we get a mid rotation starter in Hochever who could potentially be even better. We'd also get a top pitching prospect in Lamb and they'd fill the outfield hole left by Gordon with Byrd unless they prefer to roll the dice and take Colvin instead. We could also kick them Flaherty, who we likely lose through Rule 5 anyway as a useful supersub with a bit of power.

 

If Flaherty is going to be lost through Rule 5, why would the Royals want him?

 

They may have a space for him that we don't. Flaherty was probably left unprotected because we have enough big league ready utility types on our hands.

[JeffH]

WSR - I'll be honest, I don't really love either deal for us, and I don't think the Royals would do the former (the Moustakas deal). I'd really want a 2nd quality asset, and I guess the argument is that Hochevar is a proven major leaguer that is a solid rotation pitcher, but I don't believe he is more than a 4th starter, and we can find and spend on those.

 

The appeal with Hochevar is that he's one of those former golden boys who didn't live up to the hype but a change of scenery and/or coaching could pay off handsomely. Their main need is a front of the rotation pitcher(Garza), not that we dont need one. The difference is, we have the money to go out and get one next year and I doubt they can afford one of the big names if the hit FA. We need a big bat, which hopefully Gordon can be and we get a mid rotation starter in Hochever who could potentially be even better. We'd also get a top pitching prospect in Lamb and they'd fill the outfield hole left by Gordon with Byrd unless they prefer to roll the dice and take Colvin instead. We could also kick them Flaherty, who we likely lose through Rule 5 anyway as a useful supersub with a bit of power.

 

If Flaherty is going to be lost through Rule 5, why would the Royals want him?

 

They may have a space for him that we don't. Flaherty was probably left unprotected because we have enough big league ready utility types on our hands.

 

That's great, but I'm pretty sure they're prohibited from adding anyone else.

[davell]

Trading Garza does NOT keep us from contending in 2012. By losing his salary, we could add Jackson, a guy with breakout potential and a middle of the rotation guy at worst, to replace him. You'd be adding conceivably 2 top 100 prospects, one of which is almost definitely a top 50 guy. This rebuilds the system somewhat, which is necessary and going to be a little harder to do with the draft restrictions. Then, nothing keeps us from trading for a frontline guy as well. Preferrably one of the Oakland guys, so they're cheap on top of everything else.

[Little Slide Rooter]

WSR - I'll be honest, I don't really love either deal for us, and I don't think the Royals would do the former (the Moustakas deal). I'd really want a 2nd quality asset, and I guess the argument is that Hochevar is a proven major leaguer that is a solid rotation pitcher, but I don't believe he is more than a 4th starter, and we can find and spend on those.

 

The appeal with Hochevar is that he's one of those former golden boys who didn't live up to the hype but a change of scenery and/or coaching could pay off handsomely. Their main need is a front of the rotation pitcher(Garza), not that we dont need one. The difference is, we have the money to go out and get one next year and I doubt they can afford one of the big names if the hit FA. We need a big bat, which hopefully Gordon can be and we get a mid rotation starter in Hochever who could potentially be even better. We'd also get a top pitching prospect in Lamb and they'd fill the outfield hole left by Gordon with Byrd unless they prefer to roll the dice and take Colvin instead. We could also kick them Flaherty, who we likely lose through Rule 5 anyway as a useful supersub with a bit of power.

 

If Flaherty is going to be lost through Rule 5, why would the Royals want him?

 

They may have a space for him that we don't. Flaherty was probably left unprotected because we have enough big league ready utility types on our hands.

 

That's great, but I'm pretty sure they're prohibited from adding anyone else.

 

Is that for anyone or just from your own system?

[JeffH]

Is that for anyone or just from your own system?

 

Anyone.

[toonsterwu]

Lamb took a step back this year. He may rebound, but he did take a step back this year and a lot more folks are down on his potential of developing into a front of the rotation type arm, as had once been hoped.

[davell]

Didn't see it mentioned, but Lamb had TJS in June. So his 2012 season will certainly be affected. I'm not sure the Royals would trade him right now anyway, because until he steps on the mound and shows something again, I doubt he's dealt period. I'm not aware of any pitcher getting dealt before he pitches after having TJS. Could be wrong though. Either way, I'm not all that thrilled with either package. I love the idea of Porcello and Turner. A package involving Profar would be my favorite though. But I doubt Texas would move him. If I could get a Perez/Olt/Odor/Mendez package, I'd be happy enough, just not thrilled, since Profar wouldn't be in it.

[StarlinOnYou]

I keep thinking of whether it's a good idea or not to trade him, but I think we can and still find a way to contend next season. Anyway, here are some potebtial targets, any of these hold any interest? To the Angels for Conger, Richards, and Segura. To Toronto for Snider, Drabek, and Arencibia. To the Nats for Cole, Norris, and Solis. To the Rangers for Perez, Olt, and Ramirez. To the Red Sox for Kalish, Middlebrooks, and Cecchini. To the Rockies for Arenado and Rosario. To Detroit for Porcello and Turner. To the Yanks for Sanchez, Banuelos, and Heathcott. Personally, I'd prefer finding a way to get some guys ready to go, but I can't see Texas trading Holland or Ogando. I'd love to get Montero from the Yanks, but I think he's probably an AL lifer. Anyway, if we deal him, my guess is it's to one of these teams.

 

I would do the Detroit deal for Porcello and Turner without thinking twice.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I keep thinking of whether it's a good idea or not to trade him, but I think we can and still find a way to contend next season. Anyway, here are some potebtial targets, any of these hold any interest? To the Angels for Conger, Richards, and Segura. To Toronto for Snider, Drabek, and Arencibia. To the Nats for Cole, Norris, and Solis. To the Rangers for Perez, Olt, and Ramirez. To the Red Sox for Kalish, Middlebrooks, and Cecchini. To the Rockies for Arenado and Rosario. To Detroit for Porcello and Turner. To the Yanks for Sanchez, Banuelos, and Heathcott. Personally, I'd prefer finding a way to get some guys ready to go, but I can't see Texas trading Holland or Ogando. I'd love to get Montero from the Yanks, but I think he's probably an AL lifer. Anyway, if we deal him, my guess is it's to one of these teams.

 

I would do the Detroit deal for Porcello and Turner without thinking twice.

 

Me too, but I really don't see them giving us a 20 year old top 25 prospect and 22 year old middle of the rotation guy who still has room for improvement just for Garza. Remember the 1-4 in their rotation for the next 3 years at least is Verlander, Scherzer, Fister, and Porcello so they're not exactly starving for pitching.

[ctcf]

Nothing terribly new, but I suppose interesting none the less

 

@Buster_ESPN

Buster Olney

Other clubs have a clear belief that Cubs are open for business on Matt Garza; expectation among some teams is he will be dealt this winter.

[RammyFanny]

PSD Insider:

The Yankees really wanted Garza at the deadline. They were offering some pretty interesting stuff back then. I would imagine that hasn't changed.

http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=669909&page=15

[dew1679666265]

Nothing terribly new, but I suppose interesting none the less

 

@Buster_ESPN

Buster Olney

Other clubs have a clear belief that Cubs are open for business on Matt Garza; expectation among some teams is he will be dealt this winter.

 

There's only two scenarios where I think this is a good idea:

1) We get blown away by a deal.

2) Theo and co are not confident Garza will repeat this season's success.

 

Otherwise, I'm not a big fan of trying hard to move Garza.

[Guest]

Nothing terribly new, but I suppose interesting none the less

 

@Buster_ESPN

Buster Olney

Other clubs have a clear belief that Cubs are open for business on Matt Garza; expectation among some teams is he will be dealt this winter.

 

There's only two scenarios where I think this is a good idea:

1) We get blown away by a deal.

2) Theo and co are not confident Garza will repeat this season's success.

 

Otherwise, I'm not a big fan of trying hard to move Garza.

Or

 

3) you've decided to punt on 2012 (and maybe 2013) and want as much talent in return as you can get.

 

Also known as the good old burn it to the ground and start fresh approach.

 

I seriously doubt that happens after repeated (and largely ignored by the local media) mentions of parallel fronts, but it is a third possibility.

[davell]

I want a top 25 pitching prospect, a top 100 hitting prospect and 2 guys that would fall somewhere in the Cubs top 20 as well. If we can't get this, keep him and try to give him some help.