Garza To Rangers -- Olt, Edwards, Grimm to Chi (Post 607)

[CSF77]

John Arguello ‏@CubsDen 25m
UPDATE: Hearing that it was a Texas pitcher's meds, not Garza's, that held the deal up

 

[dabears253313]

That's a good sign about the Rangers. Maybe Garza will be here to stay. =)

 

[X]

That's a good sign about the Rangers. Maybe Garza will be here to stay. =)

highly unlikely.

 

[dabears253313]

highly unlikely.

I know I can only hope that he stays.

 

[X]

I know I can only hope that he stays.

Yeah, I'm with ya. I get trading him...but the thought of securing him, Shark and Wood...solidifying our rotation for 4-5 years...it's intriguing.

 

[WindyCity]

Yeah, I'm with ya. I get trading him...but the thought of securing him, Shark and Wood...solidifying our rotation for 4-5 years...it's intriguing.

It is intriguing.

But lots of media guys have been talking about how Garza wants 5 years at 20 million.

For me that is too much money and too much risk with his health.

 

[X]

It is intriguing.

But lots of media guys have been talking about how Garza wants 5 years at 20 million.

For me that is too much money and too much risk with his health.

Oh I agree. His health is a factor, and that coupled with his 3.8 career ERA would definitely make a 5/100 risky.

 

[Franko725]

Regardless of whether or not we would all like to see him re-signed, he will be traded before the deadline. Probably before the end of the weekend. The only real hope at this point is that they get a really nice haul of prospects back in the trade.

 

[WindyCity]

Yeah, I'm with ya. I get trading him...but the thought of securing him, Shark and Wood...solidifying our rotation for 4-5 years...it's intriguing.

Bruce Levine said that if Garza would accept 5 years 75 million he would be resigned already.

They have to trade him with the contract demands where they are.

 

[SilenceS]

They were ready to give Sanchez 80 million, but wont go around 90 to 95 to get Garza?

 

[SilenceS]

Oh I agree. His health is a factor, and that coupled with his 3.8 career ERA would definitely make a 5/100 risky.

ERA is such a useless stat now and look where he pitched. He did it in the AL EAST. That's like throwing a 3.3 ERA in other divisions. Also, what health factor. He has had one problem his whole career. He came back and his velocity is as good as it was before. People are over exaggerating the injury concern.

 

[X]

ERA is such a useless stat now and look where he pitched. He did it in the AL EAST. That's like throwing a 3.3 ERA in other divisions. Also, what health factor. He has had one problem his whole career. He came back and his velocity is as good as it was before. People are over exaggerating the injury concern.

Not trolling, honest question -- do you think he's worth $20M per year?

 

[SilenceS]

Not trolling, honest question -- do you think he's worth $20M per year?

I don't think that's what he is asking. I think he would take 5 years at around 18 million and yes, in todays market, he is worth that. Look what front end pitchers get. Garza is no ace, but he has ace stuff. He is a 2, but tell me who are the Cubs going to find in the next 5 years to be as good with Garza without having to drop the farm for them? The Cubs are a big market team. Don't worry about the money. Soriano comes off next year and Marmol is off now. A 100 million dollar payroll is unacceptable for the size market the Cubs have and the revenue they garner. They are also up for new tv contracts that are going to make them more money. Plus the jumbotrong that is suppose to bring in an extra 50 to 60 million a year in revenue.

 

[X]

I don't think that's what he is asking. I think he would take 5 years at around 18 million and yes, in todays market, he is worth that. Look what front end pitchers get. Garza is no ace, but he has ace stuff. He is a 2, but tell me who are the Cubs going to find in the next 5 years to be as good with Garza without having to drop the farm for them? The Cubs are a big market team. Don't worry about the money. Soriano comes off next year and Marmol is off now. A 100 million dollar payroll is unacceptable for the size market the Cubs have and the revenue they garner. They are also up for new tv contracts that are going to make them more money. Plus the jumbotrong that is suppose to bring in an extra 50 to 60 million a year in revenue.

That's fair. Our numbers differ a bit (I think he should be around $16M/yr), but I wouldn't be upset if he got north of 18+...and good point about trading for a starter.

Like I've said, I hope we resign him. If we do, it's probably going to be a bit above his worth (making your $18M likely, if not a tad low)...I just don't think we DO keep him.

 

[Cubs2008]

I agree SilenceS. That's a good point about "who else are they going to find". 5 Years is extreme, who knows that far out, but certainly in the short term there probably aren't much better options out there. Maybe Gallardo, but I'm not really a big fan of his, he seems to choke in big games.

I think the real question here is what year is this team looking to be serious about the big league team? If it's two years from now then Garza could still help, if it's longer than that then you may as well trade him. Not that I'm agreeing with that philosophy, but just accepting the fact that we're facing that type of thinking.

 

[CSF77]

Sanchez's contract should be his top end. Even then his contact rate is higher now then it was before along with his fly ball rate. He is not a pitcher with the talent of a cliff Lee or along those lines. So that places him into a #2 slot. Now looking at all of the factors involved a Sanchez type of deal would be concidered generous. If he envisions himself a 100 mil plus guy? Good luck and Gods speed on that journey.

 

[chibears55]

ERA is such a useless stat now and look where he pitched. He did it in the AL EAST. That's like throwing a 3.3 ERA in other divisions.

then he still not doing to good .. AL WEST with Twins 4.47 ERA.. NL CENTRAL with Cubs 3.45 ERA :shrug:

Garza a good starter, but i think its a bit over blown when i hear the AL EAST excuse for starters ERA..
theres a lot of AVG. starters that pitched in AL EAST and have better ERAs..

here a few that pitching in AL east this year..

look at chris archer that most say is garbage , he has a 3.56 ERA in 15 Games, and 2.96 ERA this year with the Rays

Matt Moore 3.56 ERA in 56 Games with Rays, 3.44 ERA this year

wei-Yin Chen 3.6 ERA, 2.67 ERA this year with Orioles

Miguel Gonzalez 3.3 ERA with Orioles

Hiroki Kuroda 2 yrs with yankees 3.09 ERA

Cllay Buchholtz 3.6 ERA with redsox

the problem with Garza IMO. is that he throws a lot of pitches and dont accumulate innings , he good for 6+ innings most games

last 3 yrs with cubs.. only 25 out of 60 starts he has gone 7 IP or better ..
thats why most baseball people and myself, dont see him being anything more then a no. 3 starter at best on a good contending team...

but tell me who are the Cubs going to find in the next 5 years to be as good with Garza without having to drop the farm for them?

kinda hard to predict who going to be available in next 5 yrs or what kid from cubs or anyone system that could come up and be as effective.

sorry but for me, garza worth no more the 14-16 per., and i think 5 yrs is too long for a starter who 30 and hasnt been consistently good.

 

[SilenceS]

then he still not doing to good .. AL WEST with Twins 4.47 ERA.. NL CENTRAL with Cubs 3.45 ERA :shrug:

Garza a good starter, but i think its a bit over blown when i hear the AL EAST excuse for starters ERA..
theres a lot of AVG. starters that pitched in AL EAST and have better ERAs..

here a few that pitching in AL east this year..

look at chris archer that most say is garbage , he has a 3.56 ERA in 15 Games, and 2.96 ERA this year with the Rays

Matt Moore 3.56 ERA in 56 Games with Rays, 3.44 ERA this year

wei-Yin Chen 3.6 ERA, 2.67 ERA this year with Orioles

Miguel Gonzalez 3.3 ERA with Orioles

Hiroki Kuroda 2 yrs with yankees 3.09 ERA

Cllay Buchholtz 3.6 ERA with redsox

the problem with Garza IMO. is that he throws a lot of pitches and dont accumulate innings , he good for 6+ innings most games

last 3 yrs with cubs.. only 25 out of 60 starts he has gone 7 IP or better ..
thats why most baseball people and myself, dont see him being anything more then a no. 3 starter at best on a good contending team...

Are you comparing Chris Archer 15 starts to three years and almost 600 IP for Matt Garza while with the Rays? Garza pitched a combined 128 innings for the Twins. Garza was solid for the Rays and has been really good for the Cubs. He also pitched close to 200 innings for 4 straight years. He is a 2008 ALCS MVP.

Who up top has done all that. He is also in his prime.

Oh and one last thing. Until Garza last start, he had gone 7 plus in 5 straight. He is throwing the ball like a machine right now. Anyone ever thought that he may just be getting better with age like most pitchers do. Until he loses velocity, Garza is going to be a really good pitcher. I say again, who are the Cubs going to replace him with in the next 3 years? Are you saying the Cubs aren't going to compete in the next 3 years? Then Theo and them need to be fired now.

 

[chibears55]

Are you comparing Chris Archer 15 starts to three years and almost 600 IP for Matt Garza while with the Rays? Garza pitched a combined 128 innings for the Twins. Garza was solid for the Rays and has been really good for the Cubs. He also pitched close to 200 innings for 4 straight years. He is a 2008 ALCS MVP.

im not comparing careers, im just pointing out that when people say ERA numbers are high because they pitch in AL EAST, is stretching it a bit.. i just showed a few starters from each AL team that has been able to sport more respectable ERAs while pitching in AL EAST..

didnt say garza wasnt a good starter or wasnt solid for Rays, i just dont care for the AL East ERA excuse.. no need to stretch it into a different debate.

hurray for his 2008 ALCS MVP, he won his 2 starts against the redsox going 13 IP and giving up 2 ERs.. what happened against the whitesox and phillies ? he sucked
that another thing some over react with when talking about garza.. he can be dominant in some games, but he is inconsistent.

Until Garza last start, he had gone 7 plus in 5 straight. He is throwing the ball like a machine right now.

i said he was having a great season this year..

Anyone ever thought that he may just be getting better with age like most pitchers do. Until he loses velocity, Garza is going to be a really good pitcher.

you might be right, but IMO and we will shall see what type of offers he gets this off season.. do teams risk 16 + MIL per for the next 4-5 yrs on a maybe ? I doubt it..

I say again, who are the Cubs going to replace him with in the next 3 years?

you said 5 yrs before.. if he willing to take a 3 yr deal, then yes offer it..
as far as replacing him.. stats wise, your looking for someone who can go 6+ IP with a high 3 ERA

I think the cubs would like to keep him but not at 4-5 yrs 16+ Per... we will see if a team is willing to go that high this off season.

Are you saying the Cubs aren't going to compete in the next 3 years? Then Theo and them need to be fired now.

no, just saying Garza IMO and others is not worth risking 4-5 yrs at 16 + Per.
despite what he has shown this year.. seen a lot of players have big FA years and crumble to AVG. or worse the next year.

 

[JosMin]

Don't know if anyone caught it, but Ken Rosenthal discussed that Oakland has began a serious push to acquire Garza and potentially Nate Schierholtz, but only "if the price is right".