Matt Garza Extension

[Willrust]

Between reading an article over at mlbtraderumors regarding an extension for Jacoby Ellsbury and bleachernation regarding Matt Garza; something kinda clicked. MLBtraderumors discussed Scott Boras not having extension negotiations with the Red Sox. Let's face it, this is nothing new with Boras as he typically advises his clients against signing extensions when they can test the free agent market. So, I figured I would see who Matt Garza's agency is and what their track record is with extensions. A google search pointed towards Garza being represented by CAA Sports (same agency that is going to begin work with Jay-Z). Their track record with extensions is exceptionally good over the past few years (Braun, Cain, Howard, Quentin, Zimmerman, Adam Jones, Posey & Ethier).

http://sports.caa.com/baseball.aspx

This got me questioning if the Cubs really have any intent on signing Garza to an extension or if Garza has any desire to sign an extension with the Cubs based upon the lack of any extension talks. Then, I looked at some of the other CAA baseball client list and came across Corey Hart, Chris Perez, David Freese and Dan Haren. These guys fit the Matt Garza mold a little closer as they have also had injury issues of late and have not had extension negotiations as of yet.

So, what does all this mean. Well, it still points to the Cubs and Garza likely not having extension negotiations because of injury and/or a lack in desire for Garza to stay with the Cubs (whether that is driven by Garza or the Cubs is unknown).

What do you all think? Will the Cubs deal Garza? If so, will it be prior to the draft (tied to a compensation pick); or will it be closer to the deadline? Will the Cubs keep Garza through the season and be given the chance to match free agent offers?

 

[brett05]

In all seriousness, If Garza would take the extension, I could see a swap possibiity between the two Chicago teams with John Danks in the picture

 

[Mr. Cub]

I would like to get Garza locked up for a few years. But, who knows what will happen. Will probably trade him for 3 junk prospects.

 

[Willrust]

Mr. Cub,

What do you expect it to cost the Cubs in $ and years? Will he get "Ace" money (5-7 years at 20M+ per like Greinke), or will he get #2 money (4-6 years at 15-18M per like Sanchez)?

 

[Boobaby1]

Mr. Cub,

What do you expect it to cost the Cubs in $ and years? Will he get "Ace" money (5-7 years at 20M+ per like Greinke), or will he get #2 money (4-6 years at 15-18M per like Sanchez)?

Judging by Garza's attitude in the past, he has always given an appearance that he really likes playing for the Cubs. He is a fighter, and I have seen numerous times that when he is in the dugout and the Cubs pull a walk-off win or something like that, he is usually the first one out of the dugout with fists-a-pumpin'.

That said, I don't think the Cubs are in any shape to let Garza walk this year and take major steps backwards in the pitching department or development of the team, nor do I expect a trade for him unless they are completely blown out of the water and with his short term of pitching this year and last, I find it hard to believe that any team would give the Cubs just that.

I think the Cubs would be foolish not to try and extend him and I would venture to say that the Cubs will go 3 years and 45-48 million and keep it on the cheap side. Maybe even 2 years.

It's more than Jackson monetarily per year, but they aren't committed in length of contract. It also gives Garza another shot at a contract when he would be turning age 33-34.

Of course, there is still a lot left to this year, and a lot can happen to make the decision easier for the Cubs one way or another.

 

[Mr. Cub]

Mr. Cub,

What do you expect it to cost the Cubs in $ and years? Will he get "Ace" money (5-7 years at 20M+ per like Greinke), or will he get #2 money (4-6 years at 15-18M per like Sanchez)?

I wouldn't really expect him to get huge money. He has been an injury risk of late and he's not an elite pitcher, although sometimes he pitches like it. But, maybe the lack of top pitching available, he might get more than he should? I am not very good with the whole contracts and stuff like that..

 

[brett05]

Wasn't CJ Wilson like $15 mil per and Garza is no CJ. He's a $12 mil per year guy

 

[Boobaby1]

Wasn't CJ Wilson like $15 mil per and Garza is no CJ. He's a $12 mil per year guy

And Edwin Jackson is no Garza either, and he received 13 million per year for 4 years.

 

[Boobaby1]

And Edwin Jackson is no Garza either, and he received 13 million per year for 4 years.

Cots list of 2014 potential free agent pitchers:

Bronson Arroyo
Scott Baker
Erik Bedard
Nick Blackburn *
A.J. Burnett
Chris Capuano *
Chris Carpenter
Bruce Chen
Bartolo Colon
Aaron Cook
Jorge De La Rosa
Scott Feldman
Gavin Floyd
Jeff Francis
Armando Galarraga
Jon Garland
Matt Garza
Roy Halladay *
Jason Hammel
Aaron Harang *
Rich Harden
Dan Haren
Roberto Hernandez
Tim Hudson
Phil Hughes
Ubaldo Jimenez *
Josh Johnson
Jeff Karstens
Hiroki Kuroda
John Lannan
Jon Lester *
Colby Lewis
Ted Lilly
Tim Lincecum
Derek Lowe
Paul Maholm
Shaun Marcum
Jason Marquis
Daisuke Matsuzaka
Brett Myers *
Ricky Nolasco
Mike Pelfrey
Andy Pettitte
Wandy Rodriguez *
Jonathan Sanchez
Ervin Santana
Johan Santana *
Joe Saunders *
James Shields *
Tim Stauffer
Jason Vargas
Ryan Vogelsong *
Edinson Volquez
Tsuyoshi Wada *
Chien-Ming Wang
Chris Young
Barry Zito

 

[Willrust]

Wasn't CJ Wilson like $15 mil per and Garza is no CJ. He's a $12 mil per year guy

CJ Wilson was only a starter for 2 years prior to signing his FA deal with the Angels and was still paid like a #2 (5 years at 77.5M with limited no trade clause). I could see a Garza deal for similar money. Although, he could always start a bidding war between teams and just to a 6 year deal for near 100M. I don't see him getting 20M per; unless the Yankees or Saux get involved.

 

[KBisBack!]

Garza should be extended.

Constantly trading quality major league players for lottery ticket prospects will only weaken the organization over time as few of the lottery tickets pay off.

Sure someone will come whining and list a couple trades where the prospects ended up being better than the major league player, but that is the exception not the rule. For every one of those trades you can probably name 5 where the prospects either totally busted out or were below average major league players.

Sorry for yet another extreme and unrealistic viewpoint that can be totally supported with facts.

 

[Willrust]

The Cubs SP has been surprisingly solid with Samardzija, Wood, Jackson and a couple reclamation projects (Feldman & Villanueva). Their SP wasn't horrible last year from April to July, with the exception of Volstad. Perhaps they could do without Garza if they could upgrade the pen.

 

[dabynsky]

Again market dictates a lot of what Garza will get. As of right now, who is the other top pitchers on the free agent market with Garza? Josh Johnson? Tim Lincecum? AJ Burnett? I think Garza will do quite well for himself if he is healthy and anywhere near as effective as he was last night the rest of the year.

 

[The Bandit]

I'd love to lock him up, but I think we'll know what the plan is when the deadline passes. I'd give him something between the Edwin Jackson deal and the Anibal Sanchez deal for the realm of money.

 

[mountsalami]

I'd love to lock him up, but I'd give him something between the sheets.

:dennis::fap:

 

[chibears55]

A scout that was at the cubs game yesterday told Dave Kaplan after the game that if it were up to him he would trade for matt garza now after that outing..

i say if they could get a prospect that a major league ready position player (2B,3B,Of ) and a pitcher they make a deal

 

[KBisBack!]

i say if they could get a prospect that a major league ready position player (2B,3B,Of ) and a pitcher they make a deal

So two lottery tickets or one lottery ticket and a major league pitcher?

Once again at some point you have to stop exchanging quality major league players for the lottery tickets.

Experts like willrust were whining and whining about what a terrible deal the Royals made last offseason in trading away Wil Myers for James Shield.

Shields sits at 6th in AL in ERA and Myers has regressed horribly in his second season at AAA. Still a long ways to go for both players, but at the time of the trade it was assumed that Myers would already be a starting OF in Tampa and instead is barely hitting above his weight at AAA.

There are many, many cases where keeping the older, experienced, quality major league player makes the team better both presently and in the future.

I know, I used that word "BOTH" again that seems to confuse most.

 

[chibears55]

Once again at some point you have to stop exchanging quality major league players for the lottery tickets.

i dont disagree with that, but what do they get if garza decides he doesnt want to extend with the cubs..

i think if they dont reach an extension deal by July, then If a Team offers up a deal they cant refuse then they have to take it..
otherwise if they go past the deadline and garza decides he doesnt want to reup with the cubs , they get nothing but a draft pick

 

[brett05]

And Edwin Jackson is no Garza either, and he received 13 million per year for 4 years.

And he was overpaid. Lesson learned

 

[patg006]

So two lottery tickets or one lottery ticket and a major league pitcher?

For a top end of the rotation starter? There are few lottery tickets I would do that for, and that would be AFTER I try everything I can to extend Matt Garza.

I know, I used that word "BOTH" again that seems to confuse most.

Its like everything they learned in kindergarten is ass fucking backwards. Naptime, 'please' and 'thank you.'

For the retards on here who think were unreasonable...from a great friend, Oxford dictionary:

Definition of both predeterminer , determiner , & pronoun
used for emphasis to refer to two people or things, regarded and identified together: [as predeterminer]:both his parents indulged him

[as determiner]:she held on with both hands

cars parked on both sides of the road

[as pronoun]:a picture of both of us together

he looked at them both