Latest on Garza: Could Cubs expand deal with Tigers?

It's been a hectic day for me, but have a bit of time to squeeze in one last post for the year.

As many of you know, Ken Rosenthal is reporting that the Marlins are getting involved with the Garza talks.  After seeing what they offered up for Gio Gonzalez, I'm less enthused about the possibility of making a deal with them.  The Marlins are wanting to essentially give extra parts for a top starting pitcher: Gaby Sanchez, Matt Dominguez, Jose Ceda, and Chris Coghlan.  None of these guys are all that exciting to me and the Marlins really don't have any pitching prospects to offer.  They do have a very interesting prospect in outfielder Christian Yelich, but he hasn't played above Class A yet.

A reliable source of mine had some interesting information on a possible Tigers deal.  The deal could possibly involve a major league player to go along with a top prospect like Jacob Turner, possibly a pitcher like Rick Porcello.  Thus a deal could be headlined by two young cost-controlled pitchers plus another prospect or two.  The catch is that the Cubs may have to throw in their own prospect to make the deal work.

Something to mull over for the final post of 2011.

Have a Happy New Year, everyone!

Filed under: Cubs Rumors


Leave a comment
  • fb_avatar

    I don't know about Porcello. Happy New Year.

  • Not a star, but a decent 4th starter who will give you innings. Still young. He's a known quantity at least. Turner would be the upside play in that kind of deal.

    Happy New Year!

  • Just glad they're being sensible and trading the guy. Like Garza, but only on a competitive team.

  • In reply to Dan Bradley:

    I agree but it's only sensible if you get players that can potentially make an impact.

  • fb_avatar

    Throw in mike stanton lol

  • In reply to Kent Kellett:

    Sure, why not? ;)

  • John,

    What kind of pieces would the Cubs have to include with Garza in order to finalize a deal with Detroit? If it is Soriano, then I am all for it.

  • In reply to supercapo:

    We should be so lucky! Unfortunately guys like Soriano have negative value. And even paying all his salary doesn't give him much.

  • Garza and 1 prospect for 3 or 4 players is a good deal, if Turner
    is part of the deal. Happy new year to everybody.

  • In reply to emartinezjr:

    Happy New Year E!

  • This deal seems decent to me. Porcello is only 23 and has been a proven starter in the AL for 3 years. I like the fact that he was better on the road last year. Seems he pitches to contact and perhaps the huge park(outfield) may have actually hurt him some. Combine him with the Tigers #1 pitching prospect and that ain't bad.

    Have a Happy New Year everyone!

  • im not really a fan of porcello, but u have to give him credit. hes held his own for being so young, hopefully theres more upside left in him. im also not a fan of throwing in a prospect, if anything we should throw in a guy on the major league team that we dont necessarily want or need, such as barney, soto or marmol. (i understand they have two catchers who are better than soto, and a closer better than marmol, but they can always bring in another team and trade them.)

    i also agree that when it comes to miami if the talks dont involve stanton (which they shouldnt anyway) then there shouldnt be talks at all.

  • fb_avatar

    A lot of interesting stuff on MLB Radio today. Mike Ferrin was live most of the day, which is unusual for a holiday weekend. He did his show and Casey Stern's. Dave Kaplan and Jim Callis were on separately in the mid-afternoon, and then they interrupted the pre-programmed schedule to go live with Josh Byrnes in the late afternoon after the trade with the White Sox was announced.

    Kaplan didn't really say anything that hadn't already been discussed. The Tigers coming on and the Jays, Yanks and Red Sox backing off in regards to Garza was discussed. He also said those teams weren't the only ones the Cubs were talking to about Garza, but he didn't say who else. There are rumors that the Rangers and Royals are also talking to the Cubs about Garza. Kaplan went onto confirm that Theo and Jed didn't decided to blow it all up until after they fully realized what was in the new CBA. He said the original plan was to both rebuild and try to compete at the same time, but they realized it wasn't going to be possible with the new CBA. So unlike previous regimes, they decided to go all out for the long term because they know TR has their backs.

    Callis pretty said what Kaplan said about the new CBA and how it affected the Cubs plans. He also said the Cubs were going to find a way to get Rizzo, but it would be easier to do after they moved Garza and a few more pieces. He basically thinks Byrnes is holding Rizzo in place for the Cubs. He talked about Rizzo's relationship with both Byrnes and Hoyer, as well as Theo. Rizzo seems to be the kind of kid you'd want your daughter to date, and all three of them love the kid to death, but Byrnes thinks Alonzo's line drive stroke is a better fit for Petco. Apparently, Rizzo knew the trade was going down before the press release, because Byrnes wanted to make sure Rizzo knew he wasn't going to be left to rot in AAA, and of course, we already knew that Rizzo and Hoyer talked immediately after the deal was announced.

    The Byrnes interview was by far the most interesting of the day. It could be just GM speak, but I get the feeling the Padres outlook may not be completely as long-term as we have thought, and it my have been one of the reason for the Alonzo deal and the Quentin deal.

    Byrnes doesn't think a playoff berth for this Padres team is unrealistic, and even if it doesn't pan out, they'll be in a position to deal veterans for prospects at the deadline. I get the feeling he thought Alonzo would help them more now as much as he might later, where as Rizzo was all long term. He talked about the Latos deal as a deal that helped in both regards, and he basically said even if the Padres weren't in the hunt that Quinten could be useful down the road as a trade chip. After soaking it in, I came to the conclusion that it's possible he and Moorad might see Garza the same way. They could acquire someone like him with the short-term in mind and still use him towards their long-term goals if the short-term didn't work out like they hoped. Anyways, that is how I took what he said. At no time, however, did Byrnes ever say they were talking with the Cubs about Garza or Rizzo.

    Could the Padres deal for Garza? If they really think they have a shot to make the playoffs, it can't be ruled out, and they have the quality the Cubs would want, as well as the quantity to do it without mortgaging their long term future.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:


    Thanks. Great stuff, very interesting. I can't help but feel that some "mystery" team is going to get involved in the Garza talks. After reading your comments here, I can see that team being the Pads.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Thanks for the insight. If there is a way to get Rizzo and at least
    1 good young starting pitcher a way will be found.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Interesting stuff, thanks. I hope we can get Rizzo.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    BTW, Byrnes didn't say anything about it in the interview, but there has been a lot of buzz on MLB Radio in recent weeks about the Padres new TV deal. It's possible they have more money to spend, and they feel they can afford to compete.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Great info, Mike. I still have the same problem reconciling a Padres deal because it still seems strange that they would trade Latos for 4 prospects, then turn around and trade 4 prospects for as more expensive pitcher with less years of cost control. For a small market team, it would seem like backward thinking.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    But it really wasn't four projects. Volquez is a reclamation project, and Alonso is more of a known commodity and a better fit for their home park.

  • fb_avatar

    I get the same feeling about Rizzo..I believe he will be at 1b on Opening Day..Instead of giving the Tigers a prospect plus Garza, how about putting Soto into the deal,,,VMart isn't a spring chicken anymore and neithe ris Laird.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Luigi Ziccarelli:

    The Tigers have Alex Avila at catcher. VMart is the DH.

  • fb_avatar

    I forgot about Avila, he was great last year...

  • fb_avatar

    Does anyone know who this guy @ Hot Stove Cubbies is?? Some of his rumors are way off base or totally fictional..He thinks the Cubs can pull a Blake DeWitt for Kyle Blanks...San Diego would never do that trade straight up... He also said that Texas wants Marmol but won't give up Matt Harrison (a guy they've been anxious to move) for him straight up..I gotta stick to the non fictional sites like this and Bleacher Nation..

  • In reply to Luigi Ziccarelli:

    I agree. I don't see Padres doing that either. It makes no sense for them. Lots of crazy stuff out there this time of year!

  • fb_avatar

    Im getting worried the market for marmol might be drying up and the window for a great return with it. Madison is still on the fa market and could be forced to take a 1 year mid range offer. Trade marmol, Resign wood to close and call it a night.

  • In reply to Rich Cap:

    I agree that the closer market is drying up. I wonder if it might be better to wait until midseason. Maybe he raises his value.

  • fb_avatar

    John, while I think garza is gone what are the odds the cubs deal soto. Is he more of a deadline deal? Catcher seems to be a position of strength

  • In reply to Rich Cap:

    I think Soto is more likely to be traded later because there isn't a team with a big need at catcher right now. Like you said, maybe a deadline deal.

  • Dewitt for Kyle Banks?? This guy sounds like a fanboy, with the typical let's trade someone with we don't like for someone with some promise angle. Typical fanboy who overvalues his own team's players an thinks it's a even trade if his/her teams unloads someone who isn't that good for someone with value. Over on ESPN.Com some baseball insiders think the Tigers would never trade Jacob Turner....why not? If your the Tigers and you think with one more frontline starter , you can compete for the AL title , you do it.

  • In reply to Steve Flores:

    Agreed. I think the Tigers are close. Why not take a shot?

  • Exactly John, the problem with some baseball people is that no one likes taking risks anymore. Everyone is afraid of getting burned in a trade and sometimes you have to be bold.

  • In reply to Steve Flores:

    Everybody remembers the bagwell or Sandberg trades.

  • I know there has been lukewarm support go signing EJax in this forum but hear me out. Assuming you could get him for 3-4 yrs at roughly 12 per, it makes some sense. First off, I'd look at the signing as more of a long-term replacement of Z and/or Dempster, rather than a Garza proxy. For the $, you get a proven innnngs-eater who still retains some upside , due to his outstanding stuff. Let's face it, most of us are on board with rebuilding but you can't fill your rotation entirely with kids . If you do, you'll keep Dr Andrews busy operating on your relievers. Assuming we trade Garza, we're gonna need reliable veterans to eat up some of the innings that Dempster & Z have gobbled up over the last several years-assuming this is the last season for both. This would be more of a forward-thinking proposition than just what the rotation looks like in '12. I'm not swept away by EJax but we have a clear need , now and going forward, for what he brings(durability). You'll replace Garza for marginally more $, if not the same caliber pitcher, but restock the farm, at the same time, via a Garza swap. Makes lots of sense to me.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Carl9730:

    I like E Jax but if we're rebuilding it doesn't make sense to spend that kind of money. If we had decided to try and contend he would be a very nice addition.

    But we can add an inning eater or two on the cheap if we deal any SP.

    Livian Hernandez could give them 180+ IP for $1 million as one example.

  • In reply to Carl9730:

    I agree that you need guys who will give you innings. I'm just not sure you should spend 50m on a guy for that. This year there's Demp, Z, Wood, and maybe Wells who can give you 150 to 200 IP. Also cheaper guys you can acquire like Volstad.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    This is why I like the proposed deal here. With Porcello we get a young quality, established ML starter. With Jacob Turner we get that top shelf blue chip prospect that is ready for the majors. We might not get as much volume back prospect wise, but the quality is excellent. From reading up on Turner, I'm gathering his ceiling is equal to, if not higher than Garza.

  • Depends on how many major league ready starting pitchers we get in the Garza trade.

  • Even if we get a bevy of young SP prospects, we can't rely on those guys to be 200 IP type guys. Keep in mind , we'll likely be transitioning Shark to the rotation, as well. Guessing he won't go more than 160-180 innings. We'll need guys to "take the ball".

  • In reply to Carl9730:

    Yes, eat innings but not give up to many hits and walks. Prospects
    can just as easly lose the game

  • I'm good with Garza for Turner, Oliver and maybe Aaron Westlake. Turner and Oliver you have for 6 years, probably starting in 2012 and Westlake is a good 1B prospect who is in low A. With this, we can see what LaHair can do the next 2 seasons...I think you got to give LaHair a chance. He's not a prospect, but he's not old. Still in his prime...he could be something the next 2 years. You can't ignore his numbers.

  • I agree 100% with Your thinking apalifer . I think Turner , either Oliver , Smylie and Westlake is a good value deal for the Cubs and is a trade the Tiger would should make. Gives LaHair time to show his stuff and Westlake is far enough away we could probably spin Oliver or Smylie for Rizzo if Thoecracy wanted to or a couple of present Cubs prospects.

Leave a comment