Cubs Epstein says talent on way up. Garza could be on way out.

Cubs Epstein says talent on way up. Garza could be on way out.

Theo Epstein has spoken. He is letting you know one, maybe two, things.

One, the rebuilding plan is working and he sees it coming to fruition. The talent is on its way up he says. The other is the Cubs are apparently open for business and that could mean Matt Garza is on the way out. First let’s deal with Theo’s comments on the system and its progress.

Bruce Levine had the story with some quotes from the Cubs President that caught my eye. We have heard some repeated general sound bites from both Epstein and Jed Hoyer when it comes to this rebuilding plan. This time Epstein was putting his front office out there a bit by declaring there is talent on the way.

“I think there is a real wave of talent coming through our minor leagues that will be fun for our fans to watch,” Epstein said. “We hope they get to know them really well over a long period of time that includes many, many winning seasons.”

Epstein has been telling us to be patient, but he is letting you know he sees the light at the end of the tunnel. It’s not something I think we have heard in these terms to date. Getting back to the patient thing, Theo also hints that the educated Cubs fan gets what is happening.

“You want to please your fans by putting a winning team on the field at the major league level,” Epstein said. “That is the most important thing. But I do think most real baseball fans do get excited about young players. Even ones that are still in the minor leagues. They like to follow them, see them improve a little bit before they become stars.”

The other issue at hand is it sounds like Matt Garza is on the block. There was some talk of the Cubs and Garza coming together on a team-friendly extension. There seems to be nothing going on there.

Additionally, when you see two or more Cubs beat reporters having a similar angle (Garza being moved) it usually indicates a movement of sorts. It could be the Cubs FO way of letting people know Garza is getting moved, or it could be a ploy in a negotiation that may be on the table.

We suspect the former. What we're hearing right now is that they are laying the groundwork for potential deals. His health and the potential for making a qualifying offer are the X-factors. Indications are that they are now leaning toward dealing Garza, though another source indicated that he's not sure the Cubs can get value for Garza at this point.

When Theo does deal his best chip he will be looking for wait for it…pitching of course. He isn’t overly concerned he will be able to find it.

"Just a couple of years ago there were a lot of young pitchers traded," he said. "Gio Gonzalez was traded and (Trevor) Cahill. I think teams will still trade their young pitching. That was our focus last year; we tried to get a pitcher in every deal. If we end up going that route this year, pitching will be a focus."

Theo says, “If we end up going that route”.

With the Cubs sitting at 25-38 I think they already have.



Leave a comment
  • Sadly they are just not going to get much for Garza. Question marks about his health, he's a rental. It's not going to be like this time last year.

  • In reply to Mikethoms:

    Agreed, 1 prospect at the most unless the Cubs add players to a deal.

  • In reply to Mikethoms:

    Agreed. His value has gone down, but there's not as much ambivalence about trading him right now. The loss isn't as great as it would have been last year because i'm highly skeptical right now that the Cubs are going to re-sign him.

  • Any ideas on a Garza trade that you think would fit the Cubs nicely?

  • In reply to Chicago Cubs Fan 24:

    My gut feeling says Boston in a package deal for young pitching. I think Ranaudo may be unobtainable right now but maybe Matt Barnes or Henry Owens.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Id gladly take Barnes. Good arm with decent upside.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I would take either of those guys as the centerpiece in a heartbeat in exchange for Garza. That instant reaction makes me think it might be too much.

  • In reply to Monkey Shines:

    Haha! It might be wishful thinking on my part. But Barnes having a poor year ERA wise but peripherals are good. Owens has great stuff but having some command issues. Maybe...

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Barnes's peripherals at AA are super sexy. Owens certainly does have some command issues, but that's very normal for a young power lefty.

  • In reply to Monkey Shines:

    Normal maybe, but like any other young power lefty at the lower levels, there's a good chance he doesn't make it or becomes a reliever. There's risk involved for the Cubs. Boston has to determine whether they want to make a run with an average pitching staff or upgrade when they have the opportunity to do something this season. They are very good prospects to be sure, but prospects are prospects and the chance to win doesn't come along every year. I wouldn't be shy about asking for pitchers like that if I were Theo. Not much sense trading Garza otherwise since you can draft your own potential Henry Owens with a supplemental pick.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    For sure, risk is almost always part of the game in trades. Given recent history, Boston would be taking on just as much risk in Garza, if not more.

  • In reply to Monkey Shines:

    No doubt. It'd be a risky deal on both sides. It's going to depend on a lot of things. Two of them: health and stuff appear to be there for Garza (fingers crossed). The rest of the value is going to depend on the market for Garza. If there are 2 or 3 serious bidders, the Cubs could do well. If not, as we saw with Dempster, the Cubs may need to take what they can get get or keep him and get the sup 1st.

  • In reply to Monkey Shines:

    Multiple (serious) suitors would be awesome.

  • Sadly, with injuries and poor performance to date, there is little to be had in return for Garza. I think I would prefer that no trade happens, we tender him post season and we get a suplemtal pick next summer. That could be our best value at this point.

  • In reply to IrwinFletcher:

    I'm guessing the Cubs only make a deal to begin with if the return is higher than a supplemental first rounder. They'll demand greater value than that or they have no incentive to deal. They'll get something worthwhile.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    That seems to be almost certain. They know that if they give a qualifying offer, they will get a supplemental pick in return. There is no reason to make a trade of Garza for less than that.

    And Garza has seen how low the market goes for a player who has a qualifying offer. He might have an incentive for making a reasonable deal with the Cubs.

  • fb_avatar

    That will be a topic of conversation, Garza's it higher at this point than Dempster's was last year? Demp had better stats last year, and no injury concerns at all.....but Garza has had higher-end success. Overall, though, I think Garza would rank a bit behind Demp.

    Demp's value was also hindered by the whole mess around his trading, but I would expect a similar return, other words, decent, but not game-changing, and no super prospects

  • In reply to Zonk:

    I think Garza has more. Better stuff, better long term value if a team chooses to re-sign him. Should get bigger group of teams involved than they did with Dempster.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Zonk:

    There is no doubt Garza's value isn't what it was this time last year, but to say it's less than Dempster's is premature. The situations are different between the two players, and this trade market is also different.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Garza also does not have 10-5 rights like Dempster. Bigger pool means potential for bidding war.

  • In reply to Zonk:

    I think their value is very similar. As you said Dempster had a bit more recent success, but Rangers knew he really had no chance to be a shutdown guy. Garza has at least flashed that ability and has had postseason success and success against the AL East. Dempster had no AL track record. As long as Garza is healthy at the deadline and throwing 95, someone will be willing to give up a package as good or maybe even better than what we received for Dempster. Really the time missed early this year may not be as big of a deal as some people think. In theory, the time off should help make Garza fresher for the stretch run than a guy who was approaching 200 innings.

  • In reply to Zonk:

    Dempster had injury concerns, he was on the DL late June and early July. Then made 4 starts post-DL and was traded.

  • In reply to Zonk:

    I would think that, if a team thinks Garza is healthy, he would command more than Dempster did last year. Most teams that trade for that kind of player seem to do so with the intention (or hope) of signing him to a longer term deal. That is much more valuable at Garza's age than at Dempster's age.

  • I think Garza still has more value.

  • Be happy with one top pitching prospect if its possible.

  • In reply to Tom Loxas:

    Yup, if that.

  • fb_avatar

    With the idea that we can get at least the value of a comp pick for Garza if we keep him, you have to think that we are going to be getting someones top 5 prospect in a trade for him. Then you get another high end arm for Feldman (probably a top 10 guy) we are going to be an extremely high ranked system in the off season.

    The question is what can we add to the deals to get higher return? Prospects that are no longer in our plans like Sczur? A proven player like DeJesus? Maybe a Soriano/ Garza together deal?

    It is an interesting time to watch how the front office deals with trade scenarios moving forward.

  • In reply to Rich Hood:

    SZCZUR's not in our plans?

  • In reply to Rich Hood:

    "Someone's top 5 prospect" is quite vague, since one team's #3 prospect might be worse than another team's #10 prospect.

    But to use terms that are at least a little more precise, I doubt that Garza would bring back a prospect that would immediately make the Cubs top 5 prospect list.

    In other words, I doubt that it would be a prospect that we ranked higher than Baez, Soler, Bryant, Almora or Alcantara.

    It is more likely that we would get someone in the 7 - 10 range, or someone like Vizcaino, who could be a top 5 IF he recovers frominjury, a bad season, or some other large nagging doubt.

    Perhaps someone like Olt?

  • In reply to DaveP:

    This is likely true -- and the great part of that is the Cubs have at least 5 top 100 prospects to begin with. I certainly don't think they'll get a guy who will crack their top 4, yet that same prospect could have been their top prospect just 3 years ago.

  • Was Garza going to be traded straight-up for Mike Olt last year right before the injury?

    If the answer is yes, then the Cubs might have gotten lucky because Olt has been really bad. The Cubs now might get some of value.

  • If Garza has a so so year why would he be worth a comp pick.

  • I hear a ton about acquiring pitching, but let's not forget hitting too.

    I've been way more frustrated watching them hit then pitch this season. It takes both.

  • In reply to givejonadollar:

    True, but they've got hitters in their system. I'll take the best player that they can get, but Cubs lack of impact arms is a bit of a concern.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    I like the idea of taking the best players you can get. That's how you are probably going to acquire starting pitching if it's not via the draft or through international trades.

  • I would take what brewers got for Greinke. Segura was Angels #1 rated prospect and the 2 other pitchers were not bad rated prospects. Segura so far has turned into a beast! Garza has to have pretty similar value as Greinke?

  • In reply to Scheider:

    Not quite that much value but many GMs thought Garza had the most value last year before he got hurt. Of course the extra year of control had a lot to do with that. I think his value is somewhere between Greinke and Dempster.

  • fb_avatar

    I think the market for Garza will be bigger than the market for Dempster. I also think that teams that have the means to resign Garza will be willing to pay slightly more than those that don't, and there are some teams in that category that have really good farm systems. I think it's likely they get as much for Garza as they got for Dempster, and I think it's possible they get slightly more. Finally, as part of the right package to the right team, it's possible they get way more.

  • I'm not so concerned about losing Garza, but I'm wondering who else might get thrown into the deal to get something back. I would hope it would be nothing more than some of our surplus outfielders,even some who have been doing well.

  • In reply to JayPea:

    I don't think you greatly improve your return merely by tossing in some of your spare parts.

    Certainly, if you add Baez or Castro to the mix, you greatly improve the return, but I doubt that adding DeJesus to the mix would help much, if for no other reason than you now have to find a team that not only needs Garza, but also needs DeJesus.

    As a rule, I like the idea of trading a package of lesser players for one really good player. But in practice, it is quite difficult to do, especially with established players. Most package trades seem to be more similar to the trade that brought Garza to the Cubs. A couple of really good prospects and two or three long shots in return for an established player.

  • one thing i can say about a garza trade is that all it takes is one team to move the needle. if a team really thinks they need him and are on the fence about it and he has a great start near the deadline then maybe they pony up and give theo/jed what they want. it only takes one.

  • In reply to jshmoran:

    He may have the best stuff of any available pitcher, so maybe the best chance to have an impact. I think a team that wants to make a splash have to look at him or Cliff Lee.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Lee has a NTC, and it's being said that he'll only waive it to go to a few select teams.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    That's right. So that maybe gives Garza an edge out there.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Lets just say Matt Garza could only net you an Anibal Sanchez-type package. Similar pitchers in a lot of waysso its realistic. Maybe slightly less because of injury concerns.

    Is that type of package > 1st rd supp + 2 months of Garza?

  • In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    I think a Sanchez type package is realistic and I would take that over a 1st rd supp. In fact, I think that's the model of what Cubs should ask for, but don't forget that the Marlins added the useful Omar Vizquel in that deal. It's going to take a team with a couple of needs that the Cubs could help fulfill.

    The thing about the Marlins haul is that they got equally talented players with a greater likelihood of making the majors than a sup 1st pick.

  • My gut tells me the Red Sox want Garza...but I ate hajji food for dinner, so I don't trust it.

  • July 31st Trade Deadline will come much earlier this season for Theo and many Cubs players.......

    Clocking is ticking down for Ian Stewart.......rumor has it that theo & jed will send Stewart home on a one way ticket on a Kenny Hubbs Airlines.....

    With this current starting pitching staff, I see none of them here by 2015.......we need to start having "true" #1 & #2 starters......Jeff S. pitches like a #4....T. Wood is doing better, but for how long?......Feldman is a goner this year....never know when Jackson will show up......Villanueva will be back in the rotation when Garza is gone.....and then be traded soon after..........

    Anyone have a problem throwing Marmol and Barney into a Garza trade?.......

    If Garza is traded, then he will go to either the Yankees, Red Sox, Orioles, Rangers or bet is on the Orioles.

    Dale has another free pass for 2014.......guy needs to work with a team that will stick together.......

    If the Cubs are not in the playoffs by 2016, is Theo's tenure a failure?...or is it if Soler, Baez or Almora fail?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to CubsTalk:

    Have you seen Jeff Samardzija's statistics since midseason last year? He ranks up near the top in just about major pitching category. Contrary to our lofty expectations he has been a top-of-the-rotation starter for almost 2 years now. Calling him a #4 is nonsense.

  • In reply to Marcel Jenkins:


  • In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    Consider the source...

  • In reply to CubsTalk:

    Baez is not a Theo guy BTW.

  • In reply to CubsTalk:

    I have no problem adding Marmol to any trade. But we have to remember that if a team doesn't want our pile of crap, we probably won't entice them by piling the crap higher.

  • In reply to CubsTalk:

    CubsTalk, enough with the Kenny Hubbs died in a plane crash jokes. Enough. It's insensitive and in terrible taste.

  • In reply to Quedub:


  • fb_avatar

    Let's try looking at this from a different angle for a second. The angle that has the cubs coming out on top no matter what.

    Fact: Garza, at the very minimum, is worth a 1st rd supplement pick. You could say that pick is equivalent to a top 5-10 prospect. So no matter what happens were getting something for Garza whether trade him it or not.

    Any trade with Garza will involve a prospect with more value than a 1rdsupp + 2 months of Garza. This is the best case scenario. And the key difference between this and Dumpster last year. Cubs risked him getting away for nothing. There was a nice chance Dumpster would have taken that QO which wasn't ideal. No way does Garza accept it, he's looking for Anibal Sanchez money. Garza can be dealt to any team the cubs want without interupption.

    The Cubs are in the drivers seat. Even if Garza breaks down again we still come away with a Pierce Johnson-level prospect and more pool money to play with. Hover can use this to his advantage while also keeping his blood pressure down.

  • In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    If Garza breaks down again, you either don't tender him an offer and get nothing, or you tender him an offer, and he accepts it. Not sure there is a scenario where he breaks down, Cubs tender him an offer, and he turns it down in lieu of a fat offer from another team. It's very important he remains healthy through the end of the season.

  • In reply to Monkey Shines:

    I like the tender offer/comp pick for garza if we cant sign him. Signing him would be my preference though. I am not excited about what we got for Dempster and would have rather just a comp pick for him. Especialy cause I trust the new regime's drafting ability.

  • In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    I always look at prospect trade from a backwards perspective. For instance if we were trading FOR the Garza to help our playoff push what would u be willing to part with? Clearly none of the big 4...would u be willing to trade Alcantara? Johnson? Vizcaino? Where would your offer start?

  • In reply to augiepb:

    It's always good to look at it that way to get an idea of what other teams would think. Pierce Johnson-level would be a tough choice if you thought you were a Matt Garza away from winning but I think that's really what it has to be to get a deal done. Obviously Cubs could make QO, get comp pick, and pick another Pierce Johnson type pitcher.

  • fb_avatar

    Didn't mean to call Dempster "Dumpster"....stupid autocorrect on this phone.

  • Obviously this is one man's opinion, but Marc Hulet says he would have taken Bryant first overall.

  • In reply to Eddie:

    Sweet. So did Jim Bowden, for whatever that's worth.

  • I was wondering what peoples thoughts on Feldman getting a qualifying offer or even extended if he isn't traded. He's only 30, a year older than Garza, and seems like a pretty good piece that could be had for a reasonable price. I don't think he could fetch a big deal on the open market, but would 2/20 with a club option for a third be a bad deal? I don't think so. It's no secret our team needs pitching and we have a very good arm in Feldman that I don't think people have given enough thought into extending even though hes a player still in his prime and has shown he can be a good #3, not unlike EJax. If next years rotation were:


    with a potential FA signing or trade or Vizcaino or Cabrera to bump Villanueva out, I think I'd be ok with that rotation.

    I don't think trading Garza and Feldman is necesarily a good idea, if one of them can be given a reasonable relatively team-friendly extension and it seems that Feldman is more likely to give that extension. Unless the Cubs make a big trade to get a stud pitcher, they are kinda stuck with using older pitchers in the rotation anyways, so why not someone like feldman who is relatively young and has good stuff?

  • In reply to Andrew:

    I view Feldman as a sell high candidate. I think he's a 4th or 5th guy, so to me he's a guy you can trade and probably replace with a similar pitcher.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Like Scott Baker for instance. If he's able to toss something like 8-10 starts in garbage time this season, I'd explore renewing him on another 1 year contract.

  • In reply to Eddie:

    Yes, I would to in the the hopes that he takes a team friendly deal.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Most definitely Feldman should be moved before the deadline. Strike while the iron is hot. His value is the highest that it has been since 2009, and there is no guarantee that he'll be anything close to this next year. Hey, I'm sure that he would be very appreciative to go to a contender and will also thank Epstein and Hoyer profusely for the opportunity which they have given to him. His career has been resurrected.

  • In reply to Tinker Evers Chance:

    My biggest question is what kind of return the Cubs will be offered for Feldman. He's cheap and pitching well, but I doubt they get more than a low minors guy with a low floor but a high ceiling.

  • In reply to Eddie:

    If they sweeten the deal with a lefthanded batting outfielder like Schierholtz, De Jesus, Sweeney, or Borbon, they should be able to get something like what they received for Mohom and Johnson last year. That was Vizcaino and Chapman, I believe.

  • In reply to Tinker Evers Chance:

    Exactly. The Cubs guaranteed him a chance to start and they made good on it. It was an investment in his long term future. I know guys always like to stay with their teams -- especially when it's the Cubs for some reason (don't get me wrong, I think that's great). But Feldman, like Maholm, probably understands it's best for his career if it happens.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    It seems like Feldman can be a solid #3 much like Dempster or Lilly. I like what I've seen ,but their is a chance he falls off.

    I don't think we should under rate him, like Maholm.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Assuming he recovers (and is willing to sign another 1 year make-good type contract) we just may already have said similar pitcher on our roster in Baker.

  • I would suggest that "the talent" is performing at their current levels rather than moving up. When some of these guys, i.e., Almora, Soler, Baez, Alcantara, Johnson, Hendrick, start to get bumped up another level in the minors, then it is moving up. I hope to see that in the second half of the minor league season. Epstein is going to feel more preseeure from the fans and from the media for that to happen.

  • In reply to Tinker Evers Chance:

    I wonder when Hendricks moves up. The guy is just cruising through AA. I think he should of been promoted by now ,but maybe they think he's been pitching way above his head and will get exposed in AAA.

  • In reply to Mitchener:

    They won't know until they try it. That is what the minor leagues are for, to develop players and see what level they "tank out' at.

  • In reply to Tinker Evers Chance:

    I like finesse pitchers like Hendricks. Maybe he can develop into something like Maddux or Buerhle. Flamethrowers are fun to watch, but they literally burn out long before the finesse pitcher. Finesse pitchers take pitching to an art form and are equally fun to watch. I'll take the latter.

  • In reply to Tinker Evers Chance:

    Wow! It is nice to see someone understands what pitching is !!

  • In reply to Mitchener:

    what does it hurt? you never know until you try! He out pitched Garrit Cole back in high school - look it up. He has won at every level.

  • I'm more open to a Garza trade than I have been in the past. Simply because I saw what the rotation looked like with him and without him and I haven't seen that much of a change. Of course, I thought Appel or Gray were on their way next year too.

    Like all trades, I'll let the market dictate whether we should trade anyone. To me it's all about what's coming back. And saying something as vague and silly as "prospects" doesn't really cut it for me. I think Theo is going to be a little disappointed in the type of pitching prospects that are being offered. But who knows.... Kyle Hendricks didn't mean much to me last year and now he's rocketing up the Cubs depth chart.

    By the way, take this to the bank..... Some team is going to trade for Scott Hairston, I'm gonna laugh my ass off...... And Scott hairston will wind up hitting a home run in either the CS or WS. Guaran-damn-tee!

  • In reply to felzz:

    Yeah, I think all that down time has affected Garza, and it might take awhile for him to get back to what he did earlier for the Cubs.

    I hope somebody does take Hairston! Not because I don't like him as a player, but he's definitely someone that you want to flip. He's a two-year contract, right? That has some value, and his performance has improved lately. I can see a contender wanting him coming off their bench to hit a round-tripper or to fill out a platoon.

  • Just curious, do folks still think it's a good idea to trade Garza? I get that it's likely to happen, so why not focus on it, but I'm still not 100% convinced it's the right call.

    If he absolutely won't sign a reasonable (and I'd even consider market-average reasonable) deal, then OK, the hand is forced. But I think that stud hitting wins regular seasons and stud pitching wins World Series', and it won't get any easier to find top-flight pitching in the next few years.

    I get trading Dempster, because there was no chance he would stick in, say, 2015. But just looking at the odds, any return on Garza would not equal the value he creates on the field. Is it that necessary to move him?

  • That wave of talent better arrive sooner rather than later because right now all I see is the tidal wave of fan apathy hitting Wrigley. I haven't seen the stands this empty since late 70's &/or early 80's!

    I'm all in for the plan however, I as well as many Cub fans would like to see that young talent at the big league level. We see many teams around the league bringing up kids younger & younger yet the Cubs stand pat and speak of the light at the end of the tunnel. Theo is that sunlight or a freight train?!

    I knew this season was a throw away but, it still does not make it any less frustrating. Garza should go while he is healthy without question. This year is over from a competitive stand point so, I would turn and burn and get any prospects the
    Cubs can, as well as bring up & reward some of those future "stars" with a September call-up (service time be damned).

  • In reply to jaxx51:

    This is why I say there will be increased pressure from fans and media on Theo to move these guys up a level, accelerate it a little. They shouldn't be brought all the way up, and I don't believe they will be. However, when the attendance per game slips more, some of these guys will be brought up to AA from high-A and low-A, and a couple in AA will see AAA. That light at the end of the tunnel has to get bigger or......................

  • In reply to Tinker Evers Chance:

    They have a plan, it has been less then two years. They are not overly concerned about the fans because they know they will be there in droves once this thing plays out. They couldn't care less about the media. Their only concern is the process. Denizens should believe in the process as well. If, two years from now, our top prospects go the way of Brett Jackson, okay, then question it. But for now, buy in and trust in the system. It is frustrating, but will be worth the heartache in due time.

  • Do you guys think with kansas city playing better of late, they might be interested in Garza or Feldman come July 31st?

  • In reply to Arod773:

    I do. I think they're going to go for it if they have at least a decent shot.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    Dayton Moore is the real wild card here. There is an sense of desperation about him, much like there was with Jim Hendry, but for slightly different reasons.

    I wouldn't be shocked if the Royals wanted both Garza and Feldman. However, I'm not positive the Royals are the best fit. I think there is a better fit, especially for Garza, and they can also afford to resign him. Also, like KC, the Cubs could be something of a one stop shop for them.

  • fb_avatar

    John, could Garza fetch Alex Wood from the Braves? That would be intriguing. He's sort of an under-the-radar guy that I know very little about other than that the Braves want him in their rotation next year. Also, I wonder if Garza would be a good acquisition for ATL to begin with because they have two contracts in expiry after this season, Maholm and Hudson, though I think they hold an option on Maholm.

  • In reply to Jive Wired:

    Braves have been generous with pitching prospects but I don't think they like to give guys up until they know a little more about him. Great stuff, really liked him out of Georgia and it looks like they cleaned up his delivery -- though it's still kind of funky.

  • I sure hope Theo & Jed get on the phone and bring up someone soon. I doubt Brett Jackson, Josh Vitters, Junior Lake, etc are major league caliber players at this point in their development. It's a crying shame that the Cubs have worthless talent is sitting in the dugout, in the bullpen, or in their AAA team in Iowa. I realize that Almora, Baez, and Soler, aren't ready yet either. But if all three were in AAA, they'd all be on the team by now. It's time the Cubs let go of some of these "Punch & Judy" hitters. and bring up someone who is an above average hitter, field his position, and be glad to be a Chicago Cub.

Leave a comment