Advertisement:

Matt Garza to Texas likely today

Matt Garza to Texas likely today

UPDATES:

  • 6:43 PM:  Jeff Passan of Yahoo is now reporting that Garza trade negotiations have hit a snag and that the Cubs are looking at alternatives.  If you check the note below, we recently heard there are more teams involved in this than have been reported, so it would appear the Cubs have options.   Whether they can get a better deal is another story, but by approaching other teams, the Cubs must believe they can.
  • 4:42 PM: Now hearing that there have been more teams involved in process than have previously been reported, which jives with the "mystery team" tweet.  It could be one we haven't heard of.  At any rate, Texas still the favorites.
  • 4:08 PM: Gordon Wittenmeyer tweeted that a Cubs source said that an NL "mystery team" could intercept the Texas Rangers efforts to land Garza.  Certainly the Diamondbacks and Dodgers have the ability to swoop in and make a good offer.  Any other ideas?

A couple of non-Garza Updates:  Kris Bryant has won the Golden Spikes Award as college baseball's best player and Junior Lake is in the starting lineup tonight playing CF.

  • 1:13 PM: Joe Davidson of the Sacramento Bee tweets, "Matt Garza (Fresno St) trade from Cubs to Rangers is "99 percent done." Teams going over medical records now. 6 players in the mix."
  • 1:00 PM:  Some names to speculate on here from Gerry Fraley of Sports Day DFW  (h/t Mike Moody).  The usual suspects: Olt, Ramirez, Edwards, Sardinas, etc.  Interestingly Fraley reminds that Ramirez has one option year left, which would be a motivator for them to trade him.
  • 12:27 PM: More thoughts on that last tweet.  You also wonder if a deal is nearing completion if the Cubs are already clarifying their preferences in a trade package.   And is it it they didn't prefer Jackson or is it that they took Jackson off the table to try and get a better player -- one they really wanted -- in a separate package?
  • 12:04 PM: Chris Cotillo of MLB Daily Dish tweets that it was the Cubs, not the Rangers, who took Luke Jackson off the table.  They had other players they liked better.  That's very different than what TR Sullivan said earlier and you wonder now if some of this is that the teams are spinning a little bit.  It is quite possible that the Cubs didn't like Jackson as much as some said -- and given his present lack of command and low level, that would not be surprising.  It's also possible they're preparing to accept a deal and want to make sure that the media understands that they did not cave.  Either way, the plot thickens.
  • 10:41 AM:  According to several sources, Matt Garza's agent has been told that he will be traded.  "They told my agent [earlier in the week] that they were going to move me," Garza said. "They said as much as they like me they need to add inventory for the future. I want to stay but that doesn't seem possible now."
  • 9:54 AM: (John and Tom): The Cubs are holding steadfast on getting Luke Jackson and are saying that they'll look elsewhere if he's not included.
  • 9:36 AM: (John) MLB.com's  TR Sullivan writes that the Rangers are not willing to give up RHP Luke Jackson, which may be why Neil Ramirez's name cropped up today.  I asked Professor Parks' about Ramirez and he thinks that his inconsistent delivery and lack of command will relegate him to the pen, though his stuff is good enough to make him an impact late innings guy.  Parks also called CJ Edwards a back of the rotation or bullpen guy.  Makes me think the Cubs need to get a high ceiling guy like Luis Sardinas out of this deal if they're not going to get Jackson -- though I think the Cubs should insist on Jackson if they, like Parks, feel that Ramirez can't be a starter.

Sat night I was told the Rangers were the team that had the inside track to obtain Matt Garza.

Ever since Monday when I posted that info, we had heard other teams trying to get into the mix. However, Boston never seemed to want to meet the Cubs steep asking price. Texas has the motivation. Their pitching has been decimated by injuries and they have been trying to acquire Garza since 2011 according to Ken Rosenthal.

Texas also seems to be interested in locking up Garza after this deal. That would explain why they might be willing to pay the price. Last night John and I tried to keep you updated with the names we were getting that may be involved.

It got to the point where even highly touted prospect Jorge Alfaro got mentioned. It goes to show you just how much the Cubs think they are holding the cards. You are seeing a deal being brokered by two of the shrewdest front offices. It’s not going to go down without some dancing.

That is what apparently happened last night. CSN’s Patrick Mooney reported late that Texas could be moving on to plan B. You all know we trust Pat's stuff. Our immediate reaction was the Rangers were just posturing. I was told it was possible a deal could be slipping away at the time (due to the Cubs high demands), but in the end it appears it was, according to a source, “Just part of the dance.”

We just heard another name the Cubs are seeking in this deal, Neil Ramirez RHP from AA.

John’s quick report on Ramirez: Was top prospect in 2012. Struggled, having comeback year, may have been rushed. 92-94, plus curve, needs to refine command.

So stay tuned, it’s fluid.

Garza was on a plane to Colorado this morning but we don’t think that will be his last stop. It’s been a bumpy, fun ride but still expect to see Garza in a ten-gallon hat at the end of the day.

Filed under: Uncategorized

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Can we start posting Soriano rumors now?

  • Ramirez also has that good downward plane the Cubs like in their pitchers. Only issue is command. If he can refine that, then he has #2 upside.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    His command has been better this season.

  • In reply to KGallo:

    Do you think he can stick as a starter?

  • Tom,
    Best guess at what the deal looks like for garza?

  • Sounds like Olt, Edwards and Rameriez?

  • In reply to The Show:

    Hopefully more like Sardinas, Edwards and Ramirez.

    We were offered Olt, Edwards and Jackson. We wanted Sardinas instead of Olt. Rangers said fine, but no Jackson. We countered with Sardinas, Edwards and Ramirez.

    Just a wild guess.

  • In reply to TulaneCubs:

    Hope your right! Sounds like that's when Texas backpeddled when cubs asked for Sardinas tho. Could of been part of the game tho, let's hope.

  • In reply to TulaneCubs:

    Sounds plausible.

  • Don't be surprised if Garza's traded before the Pearl Jam concert tonight.

  • I think Theo is going to let Vedder announce the trade during the show.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to North Side Irish:

    COMMENT OF THE YEAR!

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    No reason to give away Garza. We have the right starting rotation. Build our bullpen, trade Soriano and Castro...bring on the prospects...let's see what happens.

  • Hopefully he won't take a nap today. Stuff seems to not go down when that happens.

  • Olt, Jackson, Edwards and Ramirez. Done, goodbye Mr. Garza, good luck in Texas.

    (That's assuming that Sardinas/Alfaro are off the tabel)

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to TulaneCubs:

    They will not get those four players for Garza.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    Agreed, just messing around.

    I think the Rangers want to offer Olt, Edwards and Ramirez.

    The Cubs want Sardinas/Alfaro, Edwards and Jackson.

    And they'll end up somewhere in between.

  • Are they still looking for a mlb-ready pitcher?

  • In reply to fsufrenzy911:

    I believe that the Cubs would prefer a MLB ready pitcher or a near to MLB ready pitcher but that none are being offered. Olt could be the near to MLB ready position player the Cubs would receive as part of the Garza package.

  • In reply to fsufrenzy911:

    Neil Ramirez is close to major league ready.

  • In reply to dgedz27:

    Ah ok

  • In reply to dgedz27:

    I see that he actually began the year at AAA

  • In reply to fsufrenzy911:

    Had command issues, took a step back. Seems to have figured it out. Prof Parks seems to think he's a #7 or 8 at best? Not quite sure why he feels that way, but ok. Others have him anywhere from #2 upside, to middle to back end starter. I remember hearing his name like crazy in 2011/2012 as a top guy though.

  • In reply to fsufrenzy911:

    I think they would certainly have preferred that, but TX only has Martin Perez who fills that bill, and he's off the table. I don't mind lower level pitching, so long as we get quality and quantity. Since the hitting talent is still 1-2 years away, Jackson, Edwards and Ramirez would all arrive roughly the same time (assuming normal projection, which is of course, impossible to assume). I think Jedstein realized that it really doesn't do much for you to have a big league arm come in now, only to get knocked around for a year or two until your young sticks arrive. I would say Cubs would have to get either Sardinas/Olt/Alfaro, and two of either Jackson, Ramirez and Edwards to make this a quality deal for the Cubs. I doubt seriously we get all three pitchers, and some folks are saying we won't get two. Here's hoping that the FO is able to swing two of the SP and one other big piece.

  • Am I missing much on Alfaro ? Few of the reports Ive read on him say he is a bad free swinger with a lazy attitude about working. Plus he has a broken hand.

  • In reply to Rbirby:

    The reports on him seem to differ wildly. Most love his upside, but i think I saw someone yesterday (Badler maybe?) say he was a backup catcher at best.

  • Where would Olt, Edwards, Jackson and Ramirez fall in the Cubs prospect rankings?

  • In reply to Holy Cattle:

    I don't think we're getting all four. I don't want Olt, since we have Bryant. Texas don't want to give up Jackson, I think we must INSIST Jackson be part of the deal. He is Texas' #7 prospect, which would put him in our top 5, ahead of Brett Jackson

  • In reply to Rob Letterly:

    Jackson's not a top 5... he's maybe 8-10...

  • In reply to Rob Letterly:

    I tend to agree here, Rob.

  • In reply to Rob Letterly:

    Olt would probably be our Opening Day 3rd basemen next year. You don't pass up a guy because you got another guy who hasn't even played a minor league game yet. You get as much talent as you can.

    If Olt is still at 3rd if/when Bryant comes up then that's a good problem to have.

  • In reply to GoCubsGo:

    Why would you ever think that? He is just awful this year.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to GoCubsGo:

    "Olt would probably be our Opening Day 3rd basemen next year."

    And this is based on what exactly?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    Olt defensively can play in the majors right now. Offensively he had a vision issue, eyes didnt produce tears, taken care of; he got special eye drops. Since his return I believe he is hitting in the .290's but i could be wrong on that. I feel like Ive tracked his progress the last month and every 10 days he seems to be hitting higher than .280. He wont hit for a high avg in the majors but he should be able to maintain a solid OBP and hit for power. My guess is he is a 6hole hitter in the bigs

  • In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    Lets see...
    1. He is one of the top prospects in baseball.
    2. Luis Valbuena would be "blocking him".

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to GoCubsGo:

    Mike Olt fan. Right here. But everyone thinks the Cubs would be ripped off 'settling' for Olt. So I am hesitant to say anything, you know, with all the experts who think we shouldn't settle for less than Profar or Perez "to start with."

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    The people who bash him rarely if ever seem to mention that he had vision problems.

    He has hit before his vision problems, and he has hit after his vision problems. Merely a blip in the radar.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to GoCubsGo:

    No, the people that are concerned about him as a centerpiece point out that he started having unexplained physical issues (one of his eyes can't produce natural tears any more) after getting hit in the head with a fastball, and possibly suffering a concussion.

    It's far worse than a simple vision problem.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to GoCubsGo:

    To Mike Moody. That's why we have lubricant eye drops. I use them. It's not that big of a deal.

  • In reply to GoCubsGo:

    I never said it was simple but ok.

    The vision problem has been corrected, look at his stats, it shows. The Cubs are not going to go through with the trade if there are any major concerns about him. You're going to have to excuse me for trusting the people who have looked at his medical reports over you.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to GoCubsGo:

    You use them after getting hit in the head with a 90+ MPH fastball, possibly suffering a concussion, and enduring unexplained physical problems nine months afterwards, in a profession where extremely fine changes in motor skills are the difference between success and failure? If so, then it's a completely accurate comparison.

  • In reply to GoCubsGo:

    Again, I'm going to side with the people who have looked over his medical reports.

    If the trade goes through, I trust in the people who looked into it. If it doesn't or he isn't included, I'm going to trust in that too.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to GoCubsGo:

    To Mike Moody. The concussion and the eye issues are probably not related. They never found out why he had the vision problems, only that he needs lubricated eye drops. The assumption is that the two are related because they occurred simultaneously but there is no medical proof. He just has dry eyes and lazy tear ducts. That's it. Unless maybe you are a doctor or an optometrist who has examined Olt you have no background to make that connection.

  • In reply to GoCubsGo:

    For arguments sake lets say they are related, as long as a doctor clears him and he passes any medical tests that's good enough for me.

    If the Cubs feel it's going to have lingering effects you would have to think the Cubs wouldn't pull the trigger (I think that's something we can all agree on)

    By all means stay away if that's the case. If the Cubs are comfortable enough with the medical reports then go for it.

    You don't think the doctors have the same concerns as you? Of course they do. It will be thoroughly looked into.

    Let the doctors do their job. You have no inside information on his health. I'm not saying I do either, I just choose to trust in the experts on the subject instead of blindly rambling on about something that I admittedly don't know much about. Just because you stood at a Holliday Inn once doesn't make you a doctor.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    Get 3 stars or don't make any deal...

  • fb_avatar

    With 8 pitchers on the DL, is it possible more than just Garza could be going to Texas?

  • fb_avatar

    If Ramirez is included, I hope you guys give me a little love-I predicted him and Olt last week.

  • In reply to Dale Miller:

    Nice job. If the haul ends up being Ramirez, Edwards and Olt, I will be quite impressed. A top 50 position prospect, a near major league ready SP with #2 upside in Ramirez, and Edwards will definitely be a top 100 guy next year.

  • Seems like a pretty decent haul for Garza but I was really hoping Boston would swoop in, I like their pitching prospects a lot more than I like Texas' prospects. If the Cubs can get Olt I wonder if he's immediately on the table. Apparently the Mets were high on him and wanted him in a Dickey deal last off season.

  • In reply to Ike03:

    Might wait and see if his stock goes up a little. It will be awhile before we see Bryant, so they have time. Probably go to AAA first. Just my opinion. I know I'm ready for it to get done!!!

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ike03:

    As much as Theo knows Boston's system, they really aren;t that good a fit. Plus, in comparison with the TEX offer, you'd probably be disappointed in what Boston would offer.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    I couldn't disagree more. Boston is a perfect fit with their pitching prospects. Texas is actually a bad fit with their top prospects being a 25 year old 3rd baseman, an untouchable SS (Profar), and a pretty meh pitcher (Perez).

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ike03:

    But they don't need Garza. They are looking for relief pitchers. Perez and Profar are not being traded. Get over that. Garza is (for the 50,000th time) a rental.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    The Rangers don't need Garza? Thats true, but their pitchign staff is pretty spotty after Darvish and Holland. I agree Perez and Profar are not being traded and I wouldn't want Perez even if he was being traded.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ike03:

    The Red Sox don't need Garza.

  • Cubs want Olt, Edwards , and Jackson. Rangers want to give Olt, Edwards, and Ramirez, and want Garza to start tomorrow night vs. Orioles.

  • John Arguello ‏@CubsDen 2m
    @sullivan_ranger says TX not willing to give up Perez or Jackson.

    Doesn’t seem like Texas is all that desperate to complete the trade…

  • In reply to North Side Irish:

    We must insist on Jackson

  • fb_avatar

    I'd be happy with Neil Ramirez. He and Jackson have about the same upside, and Ramirez is a year closer. Edwards is the deal breaker for me. He is the guy I have to have, and yes, I know he is in Low-A, but, unlike NEFTALI FELIZ, he's actually got ace potential if he makes it.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Yeah, I really don't care who the other two pieces are if we get Edwards. If we don't get him, then the Cubs should demand Perez or Feliz, and then make sure they get two other pieces of their choice.

  • Phil Rogers ‏@ChiTribRogers 17m
    Very good names in those Rangers-Cub talks. RHP C.J. Edwards, 21, has Cy Young tools. RHP Neil Ramirez, 24, is safe bet as No. 2-3 starter.

    Jason Parks ‏@ProfessorParks 6m
    @ChiTribRogers Edwards is more of a backend starter type and possible bullpen arm. Ramirez is definitely a bullpen arm; possible 7/8th type

    Hmmm...whose opinion do I trust more when it comes to prospects...

  • In reply to North Side Irish:

    That had to be embarrassing.

  • In reply to Tom Loxas:

    If Phil Rogers got embarrassed, he would have stopped writing a long, long time ago.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to North Side Irish:

    As much as I dislike Phil and I like Parks, I'm not getting Park's dislike of Edwards. High K/9, low BB/9, nice GB:FB ratio and nice radar gun readings, am I missing something here? Yes, I realize those numbers are in the SAL, but I'd very much like to see what he'd do in FSL the second half of this season.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    He is pretty small which makes it less likely he can stick as a starter and maintain his velocity.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Low BB/9 in A ball could mean he has decent control but doesn't indicate his level of command. He may struggle to hit his spots and at the lower levels he can get away with it because of the plus velocity. Pitchers can also get away with being one or two pitch guys in the lower minors. To be TOR in the majors you need three in the majors unless you have two plus plus pitches.

    These are just guesses, i don't know his reasoning, but these are common issues with stat line scouting.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    CJ Edwards = Juan Cruz -- that's why. eerily similar scouting reports at the same level. Cruz walked more guys though.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Edwards secondary pitches are nothing special at this time. Aces have 3 plus pitches, as far as I know the only Edwards pitch to even flash plus is his fb.

  • Matt garza ‏@Gdeuceswild 8s
    In Denver, but for how long? I hope the whole series!#gocubsgo

  • I don't get the infatuation with Perez. He's pitched 74 innings with a 4.40 FIP, 5.47 K/9, 1.80 K/BB, and some anemic swinging strike rates.

  • So here's an odd little question about a part of the possible scenario's that won't happen. Let's say a trade for Garza tanks and we keep him for the rest of the year. At that time we can make a qualifying offer and if he turns it down and is signed by another team then we receive a compensation pick.
    Well what happens if we make a qualifying offer and he accepts? Is he then a free agent at the end of next year with no compensation pick attached to him or what?

  • In reply to carolinacub:

    They can QO him again I believe.

    But it is pretty academic. They only way Garza would accept a QO offer this offseason is if he suffers a catastraphic injury in the second half. And if that happens, the Cubs probably wouldn't make the offer.

  • In reply to mjvz:

    Well as I said it was part of the scenario's that won't happen. BUT if everything tanks with the current trade stuff going on I like to think that it wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.

  • In reply to carolinacub:

    If he accepts the offering, then the whole process starts all over again next year, I believe.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to carolinacub:

    If he accepts, then it is a one year deal for that price. I think it is around 13.8mil.

  • In reply to Ray A:

    I understand it would be a one year deal but my confusion centers more around the QO piece i.e. If a guy accepts a QO then at the end of that one year contract is there still a QO part of the process that takes place?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to carolinacub:

    Yes, you could make a QO every year and the only change would be the QO value (based on the average of the top 125 contracts the previous season).

  • fb_avatar

    " inconsistent delivery and lack of command will relegate him to the pen"

    so why get him? we have plenty of guys in the pen with good "'stuff" but inconsistent deliveries and lack of command, not the least of which was Carlos Marmol. If he's too inconsistent to start, why is he good enough to relieve? Good relievers are guys who pitch well for 1-2 innings but can't sustain it for 6-7. Russell, Farnsworth, early Marmol. This guy sounds like he'd be a question mark even for 1 inning

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to SKMD:

    If any of the arms can turn into Marmol (07-10), it would be a great deal.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ray A:

    sure, but the description sounds more like Marmol '12 -'13

  • John Arguello ‏@CubsDen 43s
    @tomloxas and I have learned Cubs holding steadfast on Jackson and will consider other options if he's not included.

    Texas knows that the Cubs don't want Garza to make his next start...Cubs know they have other offers and more time before the deadline. Should be interesting.

  • In reply to North Side Irish:

    Good, Cubs don't need to be taking scraps for Garza. He's the best pitcher on the market. Like someone said above, this sounds like LA and Dempster last year. Acted like they were doing us a favor by taking him.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to North Side Irish:

    If the ceiling of Edwards and Ramerez is "pen arms", then I wouldn't do the deal either. I think the Cubs have to come out with one SP and Olt...hoping that Olt can realize his potential and can be flipped. Something tells me Texas will include Jackson, but they make ask for Garza's good luck charm, Navarro.

  • fb_avatar

    I'm starting to get at the point where until Garza is officially traded that, in my eyes, he will be a Cub for the rest of the year. This thing has been going on for too long with too many roadblocks and fluke happenings. Wake me up when it's over. If it ever will be.

  • So assuming Theo/Jed win the starring contest. Where would Jackson rank in our system?

  • fb_avatar

    I would love Mike Olt on the Cubs. Who cares if you have Kris Bryant? What guarantee is there that he will succeed? Ten years ago everybody thought Andy Marte was the best 3B prospect in all of baseball and he was ranked 5th overall in all of baseball. Where is he now?

    The goal is to acquire long term assets. Where they play or if they play will work itself out on it's own and if they both become studs, wow - talk about trade bait - a young slugging 3B? Stop the press.

    Don't get so hung up on what the Cubs do or do not have or if the guy is a Top 50 prospect. That being said, Neil Ramirez and CJ Edwards will probably never start for the Cubs except in spot situations. Those are long relief guys I think. Jackson is the guy you want and rightfully so. But Olt is way better than a lot of you think. It's just my opinion.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    Olt is having a well below average season as a soon to be 25 year old in AAA. If the goal is to acquire *assets*, the Cubs should insist on better players. He looks like a bust.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    Olt is barely a prospect at this point. He turns 25 in August and has a 33% K rate at AAA this year and is slugging a massive .394.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ike03:

    I don't see Olt as a bust. He has power and a good eye. The swing and miss stuff will come down. The major league average on strike outs is 19.2%. For a power hitter his contact rates are normal. I'd rather have Sardinas, but I don't mind Olt if it gets you Jackson. In a perfect world Olt-Jackson-Edwards > Sardinas-Edwards-Ramirez

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    What he's doing this year screams bust. We'll see if the first few months were an abberation but a .208/.311/.394 slash line isn't getting it done especially in the PCL. He'll almost certainly repeat AAA next year which means he's looking at making the majors at age 26. Those guys don't pan out often.

  • In reply to Michael Canter:

    reminds me of Bryan Lahair

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Holy Cattle:

    reminds me of brett jackson

  • In reply to SKMD:

    I don't think they're similar at all.

    Olt is blocked by Beltre.
    Jackson is blocked by...no one, he's just not major league material. (Yes, I know he's currently hurt.)

    Olt hasn't proven it yet but he's ranked much higher than Jackson in every prospect list (by the way, does anyone still rank Jackson?) He had a vision problem which has since been corrected and he's been hitting well since then.

    Jackson swings and misses like he has a regular vision problem. Don't couple Olt's name will the "never-was" known as Brett Jackson.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Canter:

    It's funny how everybody has given up on our Brett Jackson and Mike Olt has all the same problems yet they'd be happy to have Olt but want to run Jackson out of town.

    That's Chicago for you.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    I for one have not been a mike olt fan, I think this deal needs to be all about pitching.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    There's a big difference though.....Olt did rake last year in AA, and B-Jax wasn't very good. He had contact problems at AA, which only got worse of course

    POint taken, though

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    Marcel, I love BJax. He seems to be in one heck of a rut, but eventually, I see a solid 4th OFer at a minimum. Too talented to let his head keep him down forever.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ray A:

    Respectfully, I have to disagree. It's one thing to be in a rut; Mike Olt could absolutely be in a rut, it's only 3 months. But B-Jax has serious contact and pitch recognition problems stretching back 3 years. He was on the edge before, but last two years he has regressed instead of progressed.

    He's a bust. It's too bad, but he is.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Zonk:

    Olt was never really a contact and pitch recognition guy either, Zonk. He was always considered old for every level he played at in the minors which hid those shortcomings until he got to a level that matched his age. Did some research on him and that has been the consensus on Mike Olt from fans and analysts alike. I believe what we're seeing is who he truly is.

    If I had to choose between Jackson and Olt I take Jackson because he still has good power, good speed, and good OBP skills while playing a good CF. That alone has value.

    That said, I still think both have a chance to be MLB players in the future. For some guys it just takes longer. Jackson is 24 and Olt is 25 so they're no longer top prospect worthy but I wouldn't call them busts yet either.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Canter:

    Why do you keep insisting for "guaranteed" anything. Even car makers give guarantees but I still see those same cars in the shop for repairs. If you need a guarantee, I'll write you anything you wanna hear. Would that make any deal more acceptable to your fears?

    Point is this is baseball and there are no guarantees. Mark Prior outta college was on everyone's guaranteed list. We know what happened there. He did have success also..... in the beginning

  • glad to see Cubs sticking to their guns and insisting on Jackson. seems late in the game for Texas to start saying guys are unavailable for trade. If rangers aren't serious look some where else.

  • I the rangers don't want to include Jackson then they should trade Olt sardinas Edwards Ramirez and pay the rest of Sorianos contract

  • So who takes Garza's spot in the rotation?

  • So who takes Garza's spot in the rotation? Rusin?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Wild Bill:

    Probably Rusin or Moscoso for a few spot starts with Arrieta coming up in August.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Wild Bill:

    It could be somebody coming back. Grimm or Tepesch might be included in a trade. If it's someone on the Cubs, has to be Rusin.

    Moscoso isn't on the 40-man, and I don't see much of a point to spending a spot on him unless it's an emergency

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Zonk:

    Grimm would fit the bill as an MLB-ready type that still has youth and upside, i'd be happy with him in the deal. Not too high on Tepesch though.

    Good point on Moscoso.

  • Is Soriano interested in Texas? Didn't think he was part of this. At what point do the cubs say "You want Garza but you don't want to pay the price, we'll go elsewhere."

  • Gotta hold out for TOR pitching prospects (like Jackson). We can't settle for just RPs coming back.

    And please no Olt. He is looking like another Brett Jackson or Bryan LeHair type player to me.

    The FO has to get this one right.

  • So let me get this straight. The Rangers are holding at giving up something similar to the following for Garza:

    1) Ramirez: A likely late inning relief pitcher who's doing well in AA as a 23 year old, after getting smoked in AAA last year.
    2) Edwards: A backend starter
    3) Olt: A near 25 year old getting smoked in AAA.

    I'd pass if that's the case. Let Garza make his next start (or two). A lot can change during that time, both good and bad, but if that's what the Rangers perceive his value to be at this time, I'd be willing to take that risk.

  • Cubs should trade him for Christopher Archer.

  • Chris Cotillo ‏@ChrisCotillo 4m
    #Cubs source indicates that #Rangers didn't take Luke Jackson off the table in talks...the #Cubs had players evaluated higher than him.

    Weird...

  • In reply to North Side Irish:

    That is weird. This whole thing is dragging on too long for me.

  • 3 team deal? Could someone else be coming up with new names out of the Rangers system? I struggle to see who the Cubs might have higher than Jackson not named Perez or Profar.

  • In reply to Ratmoss:

    Sounds plausible.

  • In reply to Ratmoss:

    kind of sounds that way with the Cubs brokering a player from Rangers to flip for a guy they like better off another team, we shall see , all fun n games till someone loses an eye in the stare down.

  • In reply to North Side Irish:

    Yeah. I mean other than Perez and maybe Edwards, who else do they have evaluated higher? Ramirez? Buckel/Grimm?

  • In reply to TulaneCubs:

    I look at it as perhaps they like the overall package without Jackson better.

  • fb_avatar

    Look at this like the draft. Ramirez is a big bodied college pitcher and Jackson is a skinny high school pitcher...

  • fb_avatar

    To those who commented up above in regards to Edwards, I don't disagree that he is probably getting by on pure stuff right now, and the body type, 6-2/155, concerns me as well, but hear me out.

    1. Edwards was a multi-sport athlete who didn't even pitch full time, when he was playing baseball, until he turned pro. That is a low-mileage arm, and he is said to have clean mechanics and an easy repeatable delivery. Had he been playing baseball full time and on a traveling team that hit all the showcases, the odds are very good that he goes a lot higher than the 48th round.

    2. Fastball is said to be sitting 92-94 and topping out at 98. You can't teach that. Now, will his body type allow him to maintain that velo deep into games. Maybe not, but I'd think people would want to find out.

    No doubt, Edwards is a high risk/high reward type, but that is the kind the Cubs FO tends to like in the draft.

    Yes, his secondary stuff needs work.

    Yes, his body type makes me think of Juan Cruz.

    However, he has the potential to pay off big.

  • Northern CA connection...

    Joe Davidson‏@SacBee_JoeD
    Matt Garza (Fresno St) trade from Cubs to Rangers is "99 percent done." Teams going over medical records now. 6 players in the mix

  • In reply to Hack Attack:

    If true, the Cubs are adding players to the mix.

  • Wouldn't be shocked if Navarro is part of it

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to mjvz:

    They seem pretty set at catcher, between Pierzynski and Soto. Pierzynski having a good year.

    Jeff Baker is doing great for them in spot duty, who would have thunk....

  • fb_avatar

    I heard that Scherholtz is not in the lineup today!

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Kevin:

    They're facing a lefty, so he wouldn't be starting anyway.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Hack Attack:

    Probably another Cub or Cubs prospect involved.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Just Win:

    Hey Theo and Jed---please get this deal done so that I can focus on my job the rest of the afternoon!! LOL .

  • In reply to Bob from Salem:

    Agreed what a day

  • If Navarro is added, maybe we are getting Soto back?

    Just kidding.

    That would sweeten the pot in terms of getting a another quality minor leaguer back.

    If 6 players involved, that means we are giving two and getting four back. Going to be fun to speculate.

  • If we are getting Olt maybe Vitters is going to Texas ?

  • Is Soriano included?

  • Just a hunch but have a feeling Rangers get back Christian Villanueva. Probably a 2 for 4.

  • fb_avatar

    I don't think the Rangers have gotten anything from their backup catchers, Cub discards Soto and Chirinos. I called it earlier today...Garza and Navarro. I was hoping the Cubs would get a 4th player, or better yet, a higher prospect as a headliner. Looks like the former.

  • fb_avatar

    Garza and Navarro to the Rangers for Olt, Odor, Ramirez and Edwards???

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    It wouldn't surprise me if Odor was a surprise name in all of this. He's a heck of a hitter and he'd slot right in at 2B.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to John Arguello:

    The other player coming from the Cubs could be Christian Villaneuva. If we get Olt, they have no depth at 3rd should Beltre get hurt. It makes sense on a lot of different levels. He is probably the equivalent value of a comp pick, and he is a known quantity to them.

  • Looks like Olt and Edwards for sure and that the Cubs prefer Ramirez to Jackson.

  • Sardinas, Olt, Ramirez and Edwards for garza and Navarro. Best guess.

  • In reply to Naf023:

    Cubs would get the Rangers Top 2 prospects ? That would be a huge hall for Garza. Can't wait for this to conclude.

  • fb_avatar

    Tom Loxas retweeted this:

    Matt Garza to the Rangers is 99.9% done. Finishing medical records right now. Cubs get Olt, CJ Edwards, Neil Ramirez & 2 more.

  • In reply to Just Win:

    I'm looking at his twitter and don't see that

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Ike03:

    You're right, it's gone. It was tweeted 25 mins ago. It was from a Chicago reporter named Ben Draper, I think, retweeted by Tom.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Just Win:

    I did some searching on Twitter and can't find a Ben Draper that's a Chicago reporter. When I first read it I thought it said Betty Draper, and I did a double take and saw the first name was Ben. It was Ben something and it said Chicago NFL and NBA. Tom will know, he obviously follows the guy. I did think it was odd that when I copied the tweet and posted it here it didn't have that guy's Twitter name on it. So I don't know what the heck is up with that.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Just Win:

    Here we go, a Google search of that Tweet turned it up, it was Ben Devine who reported it and Tom retweeted it.

    "Matt Garza to the Rangers is 99.9% done. Finishing medical records right now. Cubs get Olt, CJ Edwards, Neil Ramirez & 2 more. — Ben Devine (@Chicago_NFL_NBA)
    July 19, 2013

    (that was around 2:15 or 2:20 Chicago time)

    He's retweeted that several times, and it's still up there on his Twitter feed, but if you look at the messages he's received it's mostly people ripping him for guessing.

  • It looks like the Cubs got Olt in the deal, and it just so happens that the Iowa Cubs are playing the Rangers AAA affiliate tonight. What happens then?

    "Hey guys looks like i'm playing for you guys tonight!"

  • Cubs got 5 players Including those 3!!???? WOW what a haul . All hail Team Theo/Jed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    Can't see this being a 5-for1.

  • I know but that is how that tweet reads.

  • fb_avatar

    Neither can I. I would think Navarro is in the deal, or perhaps Schierholz or even DeJesus.

  • In reply to Just Win:

    I thought the Rangers were looking for a righty bat, so maybe Navarro or Sori?

  • In reply to Just Win:

    Navarro makes sense. I can't see it being Schierholz or DeJesus. TEX is said to be seeking a RH OF. Schierholz probably has better value than a "throw in" and DeJesus is on the DL.

  • fb_avatar

    Chicago Cubs ‏@Cubs 1m

    #Cubs lineup @Rockies 7/19: Barney 2B, Ransom 3B, Rizzo 1B, Soriano LF, Castro SS, Lake CF, Sappelt RF, Castillo C, Samardzija P

  • fb_avatar

    Just found my terrible comment of the month by a Cubs fan.

    "They can't get less than they gave up. They have up 5 players for him when they didn't need to. The Korean SS they traded was the main piece. Not only will he be a superstar, but he'll be twice the player Castro ever will be... At least the cubs got Javier Baez to ultimately replace Castro in a year or two."

    And there were people who actually agreed with him. Luckily this site has some of the most intelligent posters on the web. Rarely will you see this kind of nonsense said here.

  • Who is the rangers current closer? Do the cubs include gregg?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to fsufrenzy911:

    Joe Nathan. I hear he's pretty good...

  • Great stuff from everyone. Trying to keep up on the deal and looking for someone to break the news on Twitter.

    I'll be on the comment board more after the deal breaks.

  • In reply to John Arguello:

    Thanks, John. You're doing your usual exemplary (nice word, huh?) work. Maybe if you're away from your computer for a while a deal will become official.

  • fb_avatar

    John, take a nap so they can wrap this up!

  • Really glad H. Rodriguez cleared waivers and is in our minor leagues. Once he gets his control issues straightened out, I look to him being a fixture in our bullpen for the future. Love guys like him that throw so hard.

  • In reply to apalifer:

    Never hurts to have another power arm in the fold.

  • Was really hoping the 3 pm prediction would come true.

  • I'm guessing a package of
    Olt
    Sardinas
    Ramirez
    Edwards
    Odor
    For
    Garza
    Navarro
    Villineuva

  • In reply to Chicago Cubs Fan 24:

    The twitter reports said 6 players involved and I can't see Texas parting with their Top 2 prospects unless Garza is signed to an extension.

  • In reply to SouthsideB:

    who do u think are there top 2 prospects?

  • In reply to SouthsideB:

    That's according to j. Mayo who is ok but not great at ranking prospects he has j. Lake at no. 8

  • In reply to Chicago Cubs Fan 24:

    I was really hoping to avoid the Chris Rusin Experience 2.0

    I hope Villanueva stays

  • In reply to Chicago Cubs Fan 24:

    With that package I might want Alfaro in the mix instead of one of the others. Olt maybe?

  • Whoever we get from the Rangers will either A) become a perennial All Star for the Cubs, or will be packaged and flipped for Stanton / Price.

    I believe this because TheoJed are smarter than the Cardinals GM - and the Cardinals always pull this kind of crap.

    So, this is the way its felt to be a Cardinals fan all your life.....

  • Guess I'm going to miss the news. Heading out for a family get together. Go Cubs.

  • Not going to lie, I'm still going to feel some letdown if the Cubs don't get someone who can provide MLB impact in 2014. Either that, or it might be time to trade some high-upside A guys for a high-upside AAA guy or something. The Cubs' minor league system is still bottom-heavy right now.

  • I just joined twitter last night. Who should I follow for breaking news.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Holy Cattle:

    I just joined twitter 10 minutes ago. Enter Cubs in the search and you'll get plenty of suggestions. John Arguello who runs cubs den is on there. kaplan, levine, rogers, whittenmeyer etc...

  • In reply to cb56:

    I think I got most of those. I should be in good shape. Not getting much work done today though.

  • In reply to Holy Cattle:

    Follow us @cubsden and @tomloxas. @felzzy27 is on there as well. But definitely Ken Rosenthal, Jon Heyman, etc

  • I think if John steps away for a while, maybe takes a walk, this thing gets finalized. That's the way it works right?

  • In reply to rsanchez11:

    Haha! Usually. But I have to be nowhere near my laptop -- and I don't think I can pry myself away too far.

  • Looks like a new team has swooped in and may take Garza, reported by Gordon Wittenmeyer

  • In reply to Irish8:

    The saga continues! I was starting to picture Daniels and Hoyer in their respective offices asleep with the phone in their hands. Interesting development. A little competition certainly won't hurt our haul.

  • In reply to Irish8:

    What was that deadline for the final best offers again? My guess is Texas is dragging their feet on including someone that Theo and Jed want and the "cubs source" used GW to help prod them along.

  • fb_avatar

    Cardinals send Shelby Miller and Michael Wacha to the Cubs for Garza, and Hell has just frozen over.

  • In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    Carlos Martinez and Wong would light my bong! lol

  • This isn't going to end today is it?

  • In reply to Holy Cattle:

    Probably not, mystery team just entered the picture. I say it drags out over the weekend at least, hope not.

  • Pirates??

  • fb_avatar

    If Wittenmyer is right, Cardinals could come in with Carlos Martinez and it would be very, very difficult for anyone else to match them. It would be a bitter pill for Cardinals fans to swallow, though, watching him pitch for the Cubs.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    this see above lol. would love a Martinez highlighten package. little Pedro and Wong package

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Bryan Craven:

    Doubt we'd get both, and Wong's swing first ask questions later approach is not likely to endear him to Theo and Co.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    I would love to get Rosenthal and Martinez. Have not seen Martinez much so I don't know if that would be an overpay for just Garza.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    It would probably be an overpay, but it would get the deal done and prevent any other last minute swoopings. I kinda think, if it's Martinez, it's Martinez and one or two lottery tickets.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    If the Cubs could get Martinez for Garza, and they can't, there would not be any other players coming to Chicago. Martinez is a top 25 prospect in all of baseball. Not happening.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Canter:

    Thank you.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Mike Moody:

    NP.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    Trevor Rosenthal? I sincerely doubt that would happen. Certainly not WITH Carlos Martinez. If the best offer is a deal revolving around Neil Ramirez, whether that is fact or fiction the Cardinals have heard it too, there is no way St. Louis would step up with an overpay like that. If they wanted Garza that bad, they would have made that offer already. If you are looking at STL guys, and they have a very, very good farm system, start looking at prospects ranked in the 8-20 slots of that system. MAYBE Tyrell Jenkins, whom I think has been mentioned on this site as a possible fit previously by the staff or one of the followers.

  • In reply to Mike Moody:

    Would that make up for the torture endured by Cub fans if Garza leads St.Louis to a WS championship?

  • Somebody tell me if I'm being shortsighted, but why were we going with a report of a Cubs-Rangers deal being 99% finished from Joe Davidson of the Sacramento Bee? Seems to me that he wouldn't have the sources that a Ken Rosenthal or a Chicago or Dallas beat writer would.

  • With all this bs rumor leaking, looks like the Cubs arent getting enough value and trying to use the media to get someone to make a better offer. Prepare to be underwhelmed.

  • In reply to Cubswin4harry:

    If that was the case why would they say it was an NL team?

  • In reply to Holy Cattle:

    I take your meaning and get the point that perhaps Texas feels more threatened if its a direct competitor for wild card or division.

    But if it's disinformation the message still resonates: "someone else wants Garza badly too", so up your bid. Then we just wait and see if they call the bluff.

  • The Cards definitely have the power if they decide to trade some of their good pitching prospects.

  • is it over yet? i dont know how much more i can take on matt garza being traded.

  • While this is fun and all, and the reporting is amazing (thank you Tom & John!!), it'd be nice just to hear about it once the trade is completed. Last year we had a few things fall through. Hoping that doesn't happen again. I'd bet that good old cozy Cubs Den has picked up a few new followers this week as our beloved leaders have been all over this all week.

    It's also amusing to me how predictable the steps are - leaks of big names, mystery teams allegedly swooping in, 10 PM deadlines for best offers, etc. I'd love to be see how it really plays out in a front office.

  • In reply to Morgzie:

    I know what you mean. A lot of the stuff out now is the same stuff recycled, repackaged, etc. Reporters recycling stuff, people reporting on reporters....

    I'm fatigued. Info overload.

  • Man, 99% just ain't what it used to be.

  • Sounds good to me. Just drive up the price.

  • 4:40pm: A deal sending Garza to the Rangers "will get done," according to a source of Jim Bowden of ESPN (Twitter link). He says that Neil Ramirez is expected to be the featured piece going back to the Cubs.

    is he a good piece?

  • In reply to Nik0522:

    He should be more of a secondary piece.

  • Don't like Neil Ramirez as the centerpiece for Garza, if that report is true.

  • In reply to StatHead:

    I agree

  • fb_avatar

    I can't believe we waited this long for the "mystery team" to emerge. As I said on my site today -- probably the best thing Theo Epstein acquires all week will be a signed demo of Pearl Jam's Lightning Bolt, scheduled for release 10/15. He'll probably get a vinyl too. Some guys have all the luck.

  • fb_avatar

    WHEN WILL IT END?????? I WANT THE LAST TWO YEARS OF MY LIFE BACK.

    I'm suing the Cubs and Matt Garza.

  • Ramirez was just scratched from his start tonight.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Holy Cattle:

    I am suddenly very concerned if Ramirez is really the centerpiece.

    Bowden is an idiot, so I'm banking on that fact.

  • In reply to Giffmo:

    Good call Giff. Bowden is indeed a moron.

  • fb_avatar

    JIM BOWDEN ‏@JimBowdenESPNxm 2m

    Neil Ramirez has been scratched from his start in minor leagues

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to bocabobby:

    HAHAHAHAH Drama Drama Drama

    Jason Parks ‏@ProfessorParks 48s

    RT @Vispoli: @JimBowdenESPNxm Neil Ramirez is currently walking toward the bullpen for his pre-game warmups in Corpus Christi

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to bocabobby:

    What a Jackass!

    JIM BOWDEN ‏@JimBowdenESPNxm 50s

    I am now being told that Neil Ramirez wasn't scratched.Was given wrong information. My fault for not following up with 2nd source #apologies

  • fb_avatar

    JIM BOWDEN ‏@JimBowdenESPNxm 3m

    Neil Ramirez has been scratched from his start in minor leagues

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Caldwell:

    JIM BOWDEN ‏@JimBowdenESPNxm 10s

    I am now being told that Neil Ramirez wasn't scratched.Was given wrong information. My fault for not following up with 2nd source

  • fb_avatar

    Neil Ramirez. Centerpiece. Just reading that sucks the soul right out of you. I mean I may be guilty of undervaluing Garza, but maybe even I gave too much credit to his worth. Olt is probably looking pretty good right now to everybody. Neil Ramirez? I need a drink.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Canter:

    I have to agree. If Ramirez is the centerpiece I can't say i'm enamored with the deal unless Jackson/Edwards and Sardinas/Alfaro are the secondary guys. If it's Ramirez, Olt, and Edwards i'm not impressed.

  • ...and now Bowden says Ramirez has not been scratched:

    " I am now being told that Neil Ramirez wasn't scratched.Was given wrong information. My fault for not following up with 2nd source #apologies "

  • If the deal happens with Texas I'm guessing that it's Olt, Sardinias, Ramirez, Edwards for Garza & Villanueva, but who knows?

    By the way , Ramirez reminds me a ton of Alberto Cabrera, both are big power arms, that struggled at AAA, and went back this year to have great success a starters in AA by finding consistency. Ramirez just turned 24 less than 2 months ago while Cabrera turns 25 this Oct.

    Neil Ramirez 6' 4", 200 lbs (AA) = 9-3 / 3.33 era / 17 starts / 92 ip / 62 hits / 38 BB / 118 SO / 1.087 WHIP

    Alberto Cabrera 6' 4", 210 lbs (AA) = 9-3 / 3.20 era / 18 starts / 112 ip / 102 hits / 39 BB / 107 SO / 1.251 WHIP

  • I doubt Texas would even let Ramirez pick up a baseball if He was part of the deal. If He is starting no way .

  • In reply to Bryan Craven:

    dallas-ft worth star-telegram reports:

    "MLB Network has reported that the Rangers and Cubs have exchanged medical reports on the six players involved in the deal, and Triple A third baseman Mike Olt has been identified as one of the four players in the deal. Ramirez, High A shortstop Luis Sardinas and Low A right-hander C.J. Edwards have also been mentioned in the deal.

    A second player would likely be coming from the Cubs along with Garza. The Rangers have been seeking a right-handed bat."

    who knows....

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to cubbie steve:

    RH bat? Castro (just kidding). Maybe Soriano and a boatload of cash? Unless it's a minor league bat it would almost have to be Soriano.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Canter:

    Oh god, getting rid of Soriano and Garza in one deal?

    OHPLEASE!

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Canter:

    Only other RH bat I can picture is Navarro, who is a switch hitter. Otherwise it has to be Soriano they are discussing, and the line from Ron Washington sounds like it's not a backup catcher...

    "We know what's being discussed," manager Ron Washington said. "I'll get excited if what we're talking about comes to fruition. I'll scream and holler and jump over my desk if something happens."

    http://sportsblogs.star-telegram.com/foul_territory/2013/07/rangers-cubs-continue-work-toward-matt-garza-deal.html

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Just Win:

    Soriano would be a great throw in for Texas if the Cubs paid his salary. This sis peculation on my part - please, I have not heard this from anyone and am responding to another person's post. No need to "run" with this.

  • In reply to cubbie steve:

    Cody Ransom?

  • fb_avatar

    If he is being traded and not starting he could be doing side work. Would be a POS return though.

  • This is all kinda fun actually - going to go & mix myself a nice adult-style drink.

  • Game has started and Ramirez is in the game right now.

  • In reply to IrwinFletcher:

    ...and promplty walks the first guy and gives up a 2 run bomb to the next guy.

    I don't want him......;)

  • In reply to IrwinFletcher:

    Not a good start ;)

  • fb_avatar

    I was listening to MLB radio yesterday and Casey Stern and Jim Bowden were disparaging Garza and how little was out there at the trade deadline that was worth any team giving up much for.

    Stern said "Garza has been healthy for five starts the last two years."

    I'm thinking to myself, well, he must just be bad at math. It's been one year. And I think people are making too much of Garza's "health issues."

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Gregory Shriver:

    He does have a screw in his elbow.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Gregory Shriver:

    Completely agree. Before last year, Garza had pitched at least 180 innings for 4 straight years.

  • http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

    6:41pm: The prospective swap of Garza to Rangers has "hit a snag" and is no longer a certainty, tweets Jeff Passan of Yahoo Sports. He says that the Cubs are looking to alternative trade partners while continuing to work things out with Texas.

  • In reply to SouthsideB:

    Anyone surprised at hitting another "snag" in the Garza saga? Seems like this will never get done, Cubs probably hold on to him for draft pick. Which I have thought all along might be the best deal out there...

  • Now I get why they wanted to start negotiating so early before the trade deadline: they plan on working on this deal up until July 31. It all makes sense now.

  • What about the Jim Brown tweet (I don't even know who that is) that says medicals have been exchanged. Final stages?

    Is the yahoo report more credible?

  • If Pearl Jam has started then I don't expect anything tonight.

  • In reply to Holy Cattle:

    Doesn't Theo know that Pearl Jam hasn't been a relevant band since the mid 90's? He has better things to do than listen to those hacks...

  • If Texas backs out I will be rooting for them to either miss the playoffs or get bounced in the first round.

    I think Garza could really help them cuz' it's not just about 12-14 reg. season starts. It's the stuff & confidence he brings that you can roll him out with Darvish & Holland for a solid 3 in the playoffs.

  • fb_avatar

    Sorry to toot my own horn here, but my company just got it's very own music video station on the Redux Network. Redux will push our videos to 100 million users via their apps for Smart TVs, Smart Devices, Video Boxes (like Apple TV), Smart Phones , Tablets and Gaming Consoles. Paste Magazine has a channel. Pitchfork has a channel. And now Jivewired has a channel.

    Cubs season tickets next year! Maybe now we can get some ad space on the new Wrigley Jumbotron!

    Pardon the interruption - I had to tell SOMEBODY and everybody I know went to see Pearl Jam! Sorry John and Tom!

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Michael Canter:

    Congrats!

    --
    Side note, I've seen Pearl Jam about a dozen times through the years, always a blast. Whoever was lucky enough to get tix to see them at Wrigley is going to have a great night.

  • fb_avatar

    Like I said before. Until I hear the words "Garza has been traded" I will act as if he will be a Cubs for the rest of the year. I'm so done with this and i'm sure everybody is. Might as well sit back, live life, and if it happens it happens, if it doesn't it doesn't. Seems like trades only get done when we least expect it.

  • In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    Dog and pony show.

  • Congrats Michael. Always good to see people get rewarded for their hard work. Hope the Cubs get a big return themselves. I've sure Theo/Jed have been burning up their phone's internal wiring the last few days.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Pura Vida:

    Thanks!

    OK - just throwing this out there. Supposed a team goes through all of the trouble of checking medical records (which is basically like when you buy a new car and you are waiting for them to wash and wax it for you) and negotiations THEN hit a snag. Now we know it cant be Garza's medicals, or they would pull him off the market. It could be a Texas player with an issue but we have no idea who is in the deal.

    Perhaps, this mystery team threw something insanely good at the Cubs (and no, I cannot believe I am saying this) and Theo said, you know what, we've got something better.

    The snag may not be with Texas. Maybe someone else stepped up to the plate ( I would think the Dodgers or Diamondbacks really need pitching the most). Maybe working the phones non-stop is pitting GMs against each other.

    I can see Theo now, phone on one ear, finger in the other, trying to hear while Pearl Jam cranks it. Nice image. Feeling optimistic. A rare trait for me when it comes to Matt Garza.

  • fb_avatar

    Garza to Texas has "hit a snag"

    http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/07/rangers-close-to-acquiring-matt-garza.html

  • Jordan Bernfield on WGN Radio at 6:30pm stated that the Washington Nationals were trying to jump in, but they are unwilling to pay the $10.5 million remaining on Garza's contract.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to JeffK:

    Not sure I buy that. Cubs could easily foot the bill if it meant getting a quality package from Washington. I have a hard believing money would be a road block in any Garza deal.

  • In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    Just relaying what Bernfield stated in his report on the Garza trade situation.

    Could the Cubs pay the rest of Garza's salary for the year? Sure they could just like Soriano, but why should they? How much better package would they really get?

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Marcel Jenkins:

    I don't think Jeff is saying that's an issue, just that WAS won't pay up. But if the Cubs eat 10.5m, you have to assume that the Nationals make better prospects available to the Cubs. I keep forgetting about WAS because their pitching is already really good. They need to replace Detwiler though, so there's smoke there certainly.

  • In reply to JeffK:

    More bad data....Garza was only making $10.25M for the entire season. He should have $4-5M remaining and rest assured that would not stop a trade if the Nats want to give up the right players.

  • In reply to WSorBust:

    Well that would be more like it. I thought it was odd that Garza would have $10.5 million remaining, but that's what he said.

  • Non-Garza news: Vitters is playing for Iowa tonight.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to Eldrad:

    Isn't Vitters still in AZ on a rehab assignment?

  • 7:42pm: The loss of momentum between the Cubs and Rangers did in fact occur after the teams had swapped medical information on the players that were to be involved, writes Passan. If medical concerns are to blame, Passan says it was likely not an issue with Garza, since the Rangers are apparently continuing to pursue him.

    Passan also notes that Cubs reliever James Russell came up in the Cubs-Rangers negotiations. It is not known whether he was a part of the deal that the teams were apparently close to consummating, or whether he could still be in play for Texas.

  • Via MLB Trade Rumors:

    "The loss of momentum between the Cubs and Rangers did in fact occur after the teams had swapped medical information on the players that were to be involved, writes Passan. If medical concerns are to blame, Passan says it was likely not an issue with Garza, since the Rangers are apparently continuing to pursue him.

    Passan also notes that Cubs reliever James Russell came up in the Cubs-Rangers negotiations. It is not known whether he was a part of the deal that the teams were apparently close to consummating, or whether he could still be in play for Texas."

  • fb_avatar

    Passan has a new article up

    http://sports.yahoo.com/news/garza-trade-to-rangers-falls-through-after-medical-records-exchanged-000611579.html

    Says the medical issue can't be with Garza since Texas is still trying to trade for him.

  • fb_avatar

    Despite the news the Rangers are still interested in Garza after the medical reports screwed up a trade, it could very well be they don't like Garza's medical report enough to give up the prospects they had discussed and want him for less.

  • In reply to Just Win:

    If there is any question as to Garza's medicals, Texas most likely would have completely abandoned talks, and Cubs probably would've just pulled him off the market, give him the QO and get comp pick. No way would they trade him for less than comp pick value. If injury concerns at all, no way Texas would offer comp pick value. But Texas is still trying to get Garza. I just don't see that as being very possible.

    That and I don't see the Cubs wasting a lot of their time entertaining trade offers on a player of "questionable" health.

    Extremely likely it is on Texas' end. Otherwise, most likely is the Cubs "found" an issue with a Texas prospect as a way to allow the Nats to come with their best offer.

  • In reply to cubbie steve:

    There was a tweet from Ken Rosenthal that it was medicals from Texas that is holding up the trade.

  • fb_avatar

    Junior Lake now batting...

  • JUNIOR!!! Welcome to the show kid.

  • Oops.

  • Junior Lake doubles on the first pitch of his 1st AB and then steals 3rd. Welcome to the bigs Junior!

  • fb_avatar

    Wow. Rips a double down the 3b line on his first pitch. Next pitch steals third. Two pitchers later gets thrown out in a rundown after a comebacker to the pitcher.

  • In reply to Just Win:

    I don't know if you're criticizing the run down but maybe he was told to run on contact.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to GoCubsGo:

    No, not criticizing it. He was probably told to go on contact. Just a very busy first 4 pitches in the majors!

  • In reply to Just Win:

    Yeah, his adrenaline must have been on full blast!

  • I just want to say what a great job John has done, I always go here first thing, I seldom post, again great job. I think the medical snag was on Olts eyes. what do you think.

  • In reply to big daddy:

    That's exactly what I was thinking. No Olt, now we need Jackson in the deal.

Leave a comment