The same way trading the farm for Rammy and Derek Lee were. However, the bigger picture is that acquiring Carlos Gonzalez would require more follow up moves if the intent is to speed up the time frame of contention to 2014. Which would require signing players like Cano and Choo. If it would just be trading for Gonzalez while keeping the timeline where it is, which appears to be 2016 for a contending team, then why would you not keep Almora who just a very similar season in A ball to what Gonzalez did at the same age in the same league? Trading for Gonzalez as a single big move would be $17M to the 2016 payroll to fill a whole you expect to be filled for $600K. The Cubs are not lacking offensive prospects between Alcantara, Baez, Bryant, Vitters, Soler, Almora, Szczur, Ha, Vogelbach, Lake, Rizzo, Castro, Castillo, etc. the Cubs have more positions players then positions for them in the near future. Why give up the prospects to fill a hole that can be filled internally by the time you are ready to contend? Now if the debate was to add a legitimate ace to the staff that would be a different discussion as there isn't a pitcher in the organization that you can say projects to being an ace. However, you are talking about trading for a guy in Gonzalez that will be making $17M in 2016 then $20M in 2017 then hitting FA again so you have him for two seasons that you expect to be contending in without having to get in a bidding war to keep him in what will be his declining years. It is a short-sighted move that makes casual fans happy because the Cubs make a big off-season splash, but it does nothing improve the team's ability to make the playoffs much less win if they get there and it hurts their ability to contend long-term by giving up long-term assets in the form of prospects and future cash.