Gorzelanny to Washington

[Jntg4]

Cubs fans, stop being
s

They gave up WAY too much for Garza. Sure, it may have been mostly blocked players, but that is too much for Garza. You could have traded one of them in a different trade, but instead, they over-payed for Garza.

 

[Jntg4]

I think the only rule on this is probably unwritten. Managers are always trying to find a left handed starter or two to fill their rotation.

Managers don't sign players.

 

[Capt. Serious]

Hendry is jesus, amirite CO?

 

[Derkach77]

I love this deal.

 

[Lefty]

Yeah. "Semantics". It's not like I misquoted you. Or that you alluded to having "more" to back up your statement. You made a statement implying the Cubs gave up a bevy of highly rated and sure fire prospects. They didn't. You claimed to have "more" on that later but instead decide to do nothing more than post and say I got hung up on semantics.

It's no tlike I took you literally and said "OMGZERSS THE CUBZ STILL HAVE TE MINOR LEAGUERSZ THEY DIDNT GIVE UP TH FAMRSZ!"

I was obviosuly disagreeing with your assesment of the talent/players the Cubs gave up.

Nice work.

Still not sure how the Cubs gave up too much to get Matt Garza when the only MLB player they even traded away was Sam Fuld. The other guys may never even see the big leagues. No one will be able to acurrately evaluate this trade for years to see what the Cubs actually gave up.

All we know now is that they didn't trade a bunch of their top prospects for Garza. The Cubs didn't sell the farm.

Fucking Christ.

Look, the farm system for the Cubs was not bursting at the seams with surefire prospects. In fact, I don't think they had very many (if any at all) to begin with. Then, when you go and give up a good chunk of what little they had (two of the top-4 players on their AA squad in OBP in 2010 with at least 300 PA's [Chirinos and Guyer], a 21-year old that was torching high-A ball in 2010 [Archer] and a 19-year old long on promise [Lee]) and leave yourself with Josh Vitters (fell off a cliff in 2010) and Andrew Cashner (really the only viable prize left), you have, for all intents and purposes "sold the farm".

And considering what the Brewers gave up for Greinke, the Cubs paid a steeper price for a lesser pitcher. How is that hard for you to understand?

 

[Capt. Serious]

I love this deal.

LOL, you love everything.

 

[Jntg4]

Fucking Christ.

Look, the farm system for the Cubs was not bursting at the seams with surefire prospects. In fact, I don't think they had very many (if any at all) to begin with. Then, when you go and give up a good chunk of what little they had (two of the top-4 players on their AA squad in OBP in 2010 with at least 300 PA's [Chirinos and Guyer], a 21-year old that was torching high-A ball in 2010 [Archer] and a 19-year old long on promise [Lee]) and leave yourself with Josh Vitters (fell off a cliff in 2010) and Andrew Cashner (really the only viable prize left), you have, for all intents and purposes "sold the farm".

And considering what the Brewers gave up for Greinke, the Cubs paid a steeper price for a lesser pitcher. How is that hard for you to understand?

Cashner doesn't count as a prospect. McNutt does though, and Brett Jackson. But I agree with you beyond that.

 

[daddies3angels]

Cubs fans, stop being
s

They gave up WAY too much for Garza. Sure, it may have been mostly blocked players, but that is too much for Garza. You could have traded one of them in a different trade, but instead, they over-payed for Garza.

Once again to get 27 y/o pitcher in his prime making 6 mil this year and coming off 15 wins you have to give up something to get something. Again prospects are NOT PROVEN. So stop saying he gave up to much.

 

[daddies3angels]

MIL gave up a MLB SS, MLB CF, 2 pitching prospects...Cubs gave up NOOOOOOOOOO MLB players and 4 prospects. So again dont say Cubs gave up more then MIL.

 

[Jntg4]

MIL gave up a MLB SS, MLB CF, 2 pitching prospects...Cubs gave up NOOOOOOOOOO MLB players and 4 prospects. So again dont say Cubs gave up more then MIL.

MIL gave up no really GOOD players, and they got a replacement MLB player for one of the MLB players they gave up in the same trade as Greinke.

 

[Jntg4]

Once again to get 27 y/o pitcher in his prime making 6 mil this year and coming off 15 wins you have to give up something to get something. Again prospects are NOT PROVEN. So stop saying he gave up to much.

Right, so you can trade the entire Tennessee Smokies roster for Juan Pierre, and it is good because your players aren't proven.

 

[daddies3angels]

Right, so you can trade the entire Tennessee Smokies roster for Juan Pierre, and it is good because your players aren't proven.

They traded 3 guys for Pierre. I thought they should have kept Pierre myself. He would look great in 1 spot still today.

 

[Jntg4]

They traded 3 guys for Pierre. I thought they should have kept Pierre myself. He would look great in 1 spot still today.

No, I meant theoretically. I didn't mean when they actually traded for him.

 

[AddisonStation]

I get your point with the whole proven/unproven thing but I don't agree with it.

At some point frickin every player is unproven and at some point proven players will not live up to their proven track record.

You need to have players that you believe could succeed and if they don't oh well. I agree that people put too much into prospects but you cant just trade them all away.

 

[Capt. Serious]

They traded 3 guys for Pierre. I thought they should have kept Pierre myself. He would look great in 1 spot still today.

Yeah, that Ricky Nolasco guy I heard was pretty good.

 

[FirstTimer]

Fucking Christ.

Sounds gross.

Look, the farm system for the Cubs was not bursting at the seams with surefire prospects.

I never said it was or even made the assertion that the Cubs farm systems was a land flowing with milk and honey. I simply disagreed that the Cubs "sold the farm" for Garza.

[Chirinos and Guyer]

I already covered why Chirinos was a non factor in the deal. He was a nice asset to be able to deal because the Cubs already have a good catcher in the majors and some other prospects they like as well that aren't 26 and haven't spent 9 years in the minors.

Guyer is a loss but he's basically Tyler Colvin 2.0 at best. It's nothing the Cubs don't already have at the major league level.

a 21-year old that was torching high-A ball in 2010

Archer was at AA. Also I've already covered he's the biggest loss.

and a 19-year old long on promise [Lee]

He's 20 and a slappy middle infielder with speed. I liked Lee a lot but I'm not going to pass on a 27 year old starter going AL to NL who should be coming into his prime just because some 20 year old at Class A Peoria can run and slap singles.

and leave yourself with Josh Vitters (fell off a cliff in 2010) and Andrew Cashner (really the only viable prize left), you have, for all intents and purposes "sold the farm".

Vitters has always shown a tendency to take time to adjust at each move up. Not really surprised he struggled. Plus he's only 21 yet.

Plus I thought I got hung up on "semantics"?

Did I get hung up on them or did you actually mean what you said?

the Cubs paid a steeper price

No they didn't.


The Cubs gave up a few nice prospects for a #2 starter. They didn't sell the farm and have prospects left. Most are still at the AA or A level at this point and not MLB ready but they are there.

 

[AddisonStation]

Yeah, that Ricky Nolasco guy I heard was pretty good.

Ya.. The Pierre trade was bad...

 

[wadedog21]

Managers don't sign players.

Do you really think the GM signs players without the Manager's input?

 

[Jntg4]

Do you really think the GM signs players without the Manager's input?

:yep:

Considering that Tampa Bay's Manager said Garza would be a Ray in 2011, and then they traded him.

 

[Jntg4]

Sounds gross.




I never said it was or even made the assertion that the Cubs farm systems was a land flowing with milk and honey. I simply disagreed that the Cubs "sold the farm" for Garza.



I already covered why Chirinos was a non factor in the deal. He was a nice asset to be able to deal because the Cubs already have a good catcher in the majors and some other prospects they like as well that aren't 26 and haven't spent 9 years in the minors.

Guyer is a loss but he's basically Tyler Colvin 2.0 at best. It's nothing the Cubs don't already have at the major league level.


Archer was at AA. Also I've already covered he's the biggest loss.


He's 20 and a slappy middle infielder with speed. I liked Lee a lot but I'm not going to pass on a 27 year old starter going AL to NL who should be coming into his prime just because some 20 year old at Class A Peoria can run and slap singles.

Vitters has always shown a tendency to take time to adjust at each move up. Not really surprised he struggled. Plus he's only 21 yet.

Plus I thought I got hung up on "semantics"?

Did I get hung up on them or did you actually mean what you said?


No they didn't.


The Cubs gave up a few nice prospects for a #2 starter. They didn't sell the farm and have prospects left. Most are still at the AA or A level at this point and not MLB ready but they are there.

Guyer=Tyler Colvin 2.0? What? The ONLY thing they have in common is that they are both good defensive outfielders.