PDA

View Full Version : Garza traded to the Rangers


Fastball23
07-22-2013, 04:49 PM
Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 1m (https://twitter.com/Ken_Rosenthal/status/359414236423786496)
Sources: Garza will not pitch tonight for #Cubs (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Cubs&src=hash), deal with #Rangers (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Rangers&src=hash) near.

DumpJerry
07-22-2013, 05:00 PM
Not official. The tweet says it is not.

Fastball23
07-22-2013, 05:01 PM
Jeff Wilson ‏@JeffWilson_FWST 50s (https://twitter.com/JeffWilson_FWST/status/359417501676871680)
#Rangers (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Rangers&src=hash), Cubs never quit talking Matt Garza. Deal just needed to be refined. Here's a name that could be involved: Joseph Ortiz. Seriously.

Fastball23
07-22-2013, 05:04 PM
Not official. The tweet says it is not.

http://www.thescore.com/home/articles/1237857

Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal 16s (https://twitter.com/Ken_Rosenthal/status/359419381257736197)
Source: #Cubs (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Cubs&src=hash) will acquire Triple A IF Mike Olt, Single A RHP C.J. Edwards and a third player from #Rangers (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23Rangers&src=hash) for Garza

blandman
07-22-2013, 05:13 PM
Okay other teams, time to get desperate and do something foolish. :praying:

Gammons Peter
07-22-2013, 05:17 PM
So does Peavy get moved before his next start or do teams need to see him pitch one more time to make sure he is healthy?

Fastball23
07-22-2013, 05:17 PM
Jon Heyman ‏@JonHeymanCBS 3m (https://twitter.com/JonHeymanCBS/status/359420920957386752)
there's agreement on players in garza deal now. might be as much as a 4 for 1.

I wonder what we can get for Peavy

Fastball23
07-22-2013, 05:25 PM
Jeff Passan ‏@JeffPassan 10s (https://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/359423748945879040)
Source says RHP Justin Grimm is the third player

hawkjt
07-22-2013, 05:29 PM
Olt and Edwards?

I think Garza is considered the top starter on the market,and this seems only like a so-so return.

Hope Jake can fetch something decent.

I do think that teams do not send their top prospects away in trades much these days.

Fastball23
07-22-2013, 05:34 PM
Olt and Edwards?

I think Garza is considered the top starter on the market,and this seems only like a so-so return.

Hope Jake can fetch something decent.

I do think that teams do not send their top prospects away in trades much these days.

I think its a great deal for the Cubs

Gordon Wittenmyer ‏@GDubCub 1m (https://twitter.com/GDubCub/status/359425856982093825)
Confirmed deal done for Garza in 4 for 1 with Texas. Cubs get Olt, Edwards, Grimm and ptbnl from pool that includes Ramirez (Cubs choice)

blandman
07-22-2013, 05:45 PM
Olt and Edwards?

I think Garza is considered the top starter on the market,and this seems only like a so-so return.

Hope Jake can fetch something decent.

I do think that teams do not send their top prospects away in trades much these days.

Gotta disagree. If we got that package for Peavy, I'd be ecstatic.

TaylorStSox
07-22-2013, 05:54 PM
Gotta disagree. If we got that package for Peavy, I'd be ecstatic.

No you wouldn't.

blandman
07-22-2013, 05:55 PM
No you wouldn't.

I'm not down on Olt like a lot of people. I think he's gonna hit.

TaylorStSox
07-22-2013, 06:00 PM
I'm not down on Olt like a lot of people. I think he's gonna hit.

If we got Profar for Peavy you'd still find a reason to complain.

Tragg
07-22-2013, 06:03 PM
Cubs did well.
A quality A ball pitcher; a ML pitcher and a prospect whose luster is gone, but the reports vary as to while. Plus a 4th player, presumably a recent pick.

I wouldn't be ecstatic with that for Peavy. But that may be about what we get.

Texas pretty clearly wanted Garza and were willing to pay for him.

SoxSpeed22
07-22-2013, 06:16 PM
The Rangers realized that this could be their last shot for several years. Good haul for the Cubs, and this could drive up the demand for Peavy.

blandman
07-22-2013, 06:31 PM
If we got Profar for Peavy you'd still find a reason to complain.

Stop it.

The Immigrant
07-22-2013, 07:03 PM
Good haul for the Cubs, and this could drive up the demand for Peavy.

Colon getting suspended is what will drive up the demand for Peavy.:praying:

blandman
07-22-2013, 07:04 PM
Colon getting suspended is what will drive up the demand for Peavy.:praying:

I think the bigger problem is a lack of serious buyers. Especially if Boston doesn't feel it needs a high end starter.

soxfanreggie
07-22-2013, 07:06 PM
Olt and Edwards?

I think Garza is considered the top starter on the market,and this seems only like a so-so return.

Hope Jake can fetch something decent.

I do think that teams do not send their top prospects away in trades much these days.

For a rental pitcher who may leave in FA and allowing them to shed salary, it isn't too bad.

DirtySox
07-22-2013, 07:58 PM
Great haul for Garza, especially if Neil Ramirez is one of the 2 PTBNL in this deal. Kudos Cubs you have quite the enviable farm system.

balke
07-22-2013, 08:41 PM
Still baffled by the Twins ever trading Garza. He looked to me then like he'd be the second coming of Brad Radke.

CoopaLoop
07-22-2013, 09:45 PM
@GDubCub (https://twitter.com/GDubCub) 1m (https://twitter.com/GDubCub/status/359489017705795584) Cubs' PTNBL deal with Tex works like this: If they choose Ramirez, deal's done. If they don't take him, they get to select 2 from a pool.

JB98
07-23-2013, 01:06 AM
I think it's a great deal for the Rangers. Garza has been pitching outstanding this year. Texas has a much better chance to overtake Oakland now. The Rangers would be dangerous in a short playoff series, too, with Darvish, Garza and Holland at the top of their rotation.

What position will Olt play with the Cubs? I hear Bryant is going to be great at 3B, so they would have to be thinking of moving Olt to a corner OF, no?

That A-ball pitcher sounds like an interesting prospect, but obviously, we won't know for a few years whether he'll be able to help the Cubs.

I'm not impressed with Grimm. He's just filler.

Fastball23
07-23-2013, 04:36 AM
Looks like Soriano will be traded to the Yankees.

cards press box
07-23-2013, 07:01 AM
I think it's a great deal for the Rangers. Garza has been pitching outstanding this year. Texas has a much better chance to overtake Oakland now. The Rangers would be dangerous in a short playoff series, too, with Darvish, Garza and Holland at the top of their rotation.

What position will Olt play with the Cubs? I hear Bryant is going to be great at 3B, so they would have to be thinking of moving Olt to a corner OF, no?

That A-ball pitcher sounds like an interesting prospect, but obviously, we won't know for a few years whether he'll be able to help the Cubs.

I'm not impressed with Grimm. He's just filler.

+1. Having said that, Mike Olt will probably be the Cub third baseman pretty soon even though he has regressed at AAA. He had an eye injury (a malfunctioning tear duct) at the beginning of the year and while that has been remedied, he hasn't hit that well at AAA. Baseball Prospectus projects Olt to be a .240-.250 hitter with some power, decent walks and average defense at third base. That sounds to me like Conor Gillaspie with less defense and less batting average. Gillaspie's career minor league batting average was .287. Olt's is .269.

The package that the Cubs received from Texas is also far less impressive than the prospects the Cubs dealt to Tampa Bay to get Garza in the first place. I have no doubt that the Cubs would deal every player they got in this latest deal to re-acquire starter Chris Archer if they could. I am also quite sure that the Rays would never do that.

And you are right about Single A pitchers. Hard to say how they will turn out. Before the 2012 season the Sox dealt Jason Frasor for two Single A pitchers, Myles Jaye and Daniel Webb. Webb dominated at A and AA this year but has struggled at AAA so far. Jaye dominated at low A this year but has struggled at high A so far. So, we'll have to see about Jaye and Webb, as well as the single A pitcher that the Cubs just acquired.

And, finally, if the Sox had dealt Jake Peavy for a package led by Olt, I think that this board would have lit up like a Christmas tree and not in a good way.

Domeshot17
07-23-2013, 09:48 AM
+1. Having said that, Mike Olt will probably be the Cub third baseman pretty soon even though he has regressed at AAA. He had an eye injury (a malfunctioning tear duct) at the beginning of the year and while that has been remedied, he hasn't hit that well at AAA. Baseball Prospectus projects Olt to be a .240-.250 hitter with some power, decent walks and average defense at third base. That sounds to me like Conor Gillaspie with less defense and less batting average. Gillaspie's career minor league batting average was .287. Olt's is .269.

The package that the Cubs received from Texas is also far less impressive than the prospects the Cubs dealt to Tampa Bay to get Garza in the first place. I have no doubt that the Cubs would deal every player they got in this latest deal to re-acquire starter Chris Archer if they could. I am also quite sure that the Rays would never do that.

And you are right about Single A pitchers. Hard to say how they will turn out. Before the 2012 season the Sox dealt Jason Frasor for two Single A pitchers, Myles Jaye and Daniel Webb. Webb dominated at A and AA this year but has struggled at AAA so far. Jaye dominated at low A this year but has struggled at high A so far. So, we'll have to see about Jaye and Webb, as well as the single A pitcher that the Cubs just acquired.

And, finally, if the Sox had dealt Jake Peavy for a package led by Olt, I think that this board would have lit up like a Christmas tree and not in a good way.

Now lets be totally fair... Olt and Connor are 2 totaallllyyy different prospects. Olt is not a 7-12 homer guy, he is a 20-25 or better HR guy... Olt's floor is Gillaspie's ceiling.

Tragg
07-23-2013, 10:58 AM
Now lets be totally fair... Olt and Connor are 2 totaallllyyy different prospects. Olt is not a 7-12 homer guy, he is a 20-25 or better HR guy... Olt's floor is Gillaspie's ceiling.

Agree, although Olt's ceiling seems to be caving in. The relevant point is that we need a 3b. Gillespie is a backup and it would really help if he could play OF too.

rdivaldi
07-23-2013, 11:31 AM
And, finally, if the Sox had dealt Jake Peavy for a package led by Olt, I think that this board would have lit up like a Christmas tree and not in a good way.

Without a doubt. A 25 year old, low-average, high strikeout slugger like Olt would have brought out the torches and pitchforks.

JB98
07-23-2013, 01:24 PM
+1. Having said that, Mike Olt will probably be the Cub third baseman pretty soon even though he has regressed at AAA. He had an eye injury (a malfunctioning tear duct) at the beginning of the year and while that has been remedied, he hasn't hit that well at AAA. Baseball Prospectus projects Olt to be a .240-.250 hitter with some power, decent walks and average defense at third base. That sounds to me like Conor Gillaspie with less defense and less batting average. Gillaspie's career minor league batting average was .287. Olt's is .269.

The package that the Cubs received from Texas is also far less impressive than the prospects the Cubs dealt to Tampa Bay to get Garza in the first place. I have no doubt that the Cubs would deal every player they got in this latest deal to re-acquire starter Chris Archer if they could. I am also quite sure that the Rays would never do that.

And you are right about Single A pitchers. Hard to say how they will turn out. Before the 2012 season the Sox dealt Jason Frasor for two Single A pitchers, Myles Jaye and Daniel Webb. Webb dominated at A and AA this year but has struggled at AAA so far. Jaye dominated at low A this year but has struggled at high A so far. So, we'll have to see about Jaye and Webb, as well as the single A pitcher that the Cubs just acquired.

And, finally, if the Sox had dealt Jake Peavy for a package led by Olt, I think that this board would have lit up like a Christmas tree and not in a good way.

No question about it. When the Cubs make a move like this, it's regarded as a stroke of genius. If the Sox had made a similar move, they would be declared idiots.

Over the last two summers, the Cubs have dealt four established MLB starters (Dempster, Maholm, Feldman, Garza) for packages of ifs and maybes. Could it work? Sure. It could also fail miserably. I'm just a bit baffled that so many of the writers in this town are convinced each move the Cubs make is going to prove to be brilliant over the long haul. We don't know that yet and we won't know it for years.

Domeshot17
07-23-2013, 01:35 PM
No question about it. When the Cubs make a move like this, it's regarded as a stroke of genius. If the Sox had made a similar move, they would be declared idiots.

Over the last two summers, the Cubs have dealt four established MLB starters (Dempster, Maholm, Feldman, Garza) for packages of ifs and maybes. Could it work? Sure. It could also fail miserably. I'm just a bit baffled that so many of the writers in this town are convinced each move the Cubs make is going to prove to be brilliant over the long haul. We don't know that yet and we won't know it for years.

The thing is, the Cubs approach to rebuilding is brilliant. It may not work, but they are putting themselves in the best possible position for it too. If you had to pick between the roster's, The Cubs 25 man and their farm or the Sox 25 man and their farm, it would not be hard to argue for the Sox.

The Cubs seem to be using players to build depth, any position, it does not matter. They now have 3 very good 3b prospects. That increases the chances 1 makes it. If another makes it, they move that player to the OF. If all 3 do, they can trade 1 for a weak spot that doesn't work out.

The Sox for a while have been scared to make these moves. But I think ultimately, we are not winning anything this year or next. Our offense is one of the most pathetic in the league, and we have nothing on the horizon to make it better. At some point, we have to build this thing right.

I hate to admit it, but without bias, If I had to pick between Hahn and Theo, I would take Theo.

SCCWS
07-23-2013, 01:47 PM
The thing is, the Cubs approach to rebuilding is brilliant. It may not work, but they are putting themselves in the best possible position for it too. If you had to pick between the roster's, The Cubs 25 man and their farm or the Sox 25 man and their farm, it would not be hard to argue for the Sox.

The Cubs seem to be using players to build depth, any position, it does not matter. They now have 3 very good 3b prospects. That increases the chances 1 makes it. If another makes it, they move that player to the OF. If all 3 do, they can trade 1 for a weak spot that doesn't work out.

The Sox for a while have been scared to make these moves. But I think ultimately, we are not winning anything this year or next. Our offense is one of the most pathetic in the league, and we have nothing on the horizon to make it better. At some point, we have to build this thing right.

I hate to admit it, but without bias, If I had to pick between Hahn and Theo, I would take Theo.

That is the same approach Theo used in Boston. 3 of their top 4 prospects can play 3rd and 2 of them can play SS. My hope was the White Sox could get #4 who is a AA 3rd baseman away from them in a Peavy deal.

blandman
07-23-2013, 01:48 PM
Agree, although Olt's ceiling seems to be caving in. The relevant point is that we need a 3b. Gillespie is a backup and it would really help if he could play OF too.

I wouldn't give up on Gillespie just yet.

doublem23
07-23-2013, 02:19 PM
No question about it. When the Cubs make a move like this, it's regarded as a stroke of genius. If the Sox had made a similar move, they would be declared idiots.

Over the last two summers, the Cubs have dealt four established MLB starters (Dempster, Maholm, Feldman, Garza) for packages of ifs and maybes. Could it work? Sure. It could also fail miserably. I'm just a bit baffled that so many of the writers in this town are convinced each move the Cubs make is going to prove to be brilliant over the long haul. We don't know that yet and we won't know it for years.

Yeah, pretty much. I'll give the Cubs credit for some of their international signings, they have been very aggressive and have some interesting kids to try and mold, but otherwise, I have not been very impressed with the direction of the front office. They've drafted well because they've been so terrible but some of the trades they've made have been rather pedestrian.

The Immigrant
07-23-2013, 02:36 PM
The Cubs seem to be using players to build depth, any position, it does not matter.

Except pitching.

JB98
07-23-2013, 02:36 PM
The thing is, the Cubs approach to rebuilding is brilliant. It may not work, but they are putting themselves in the best possible position for it too. If you had to pick between the roster's, The Cubs 25 man and their farm or the Sox 25 man and their farm, it would not be hard to argue for the Sox.

The Cubs seem to be using players to build depth, any position, it does not matter. They now have 3 very good 3b prospects. That increases the chances 1 makes it. If another makes it, they move that player to the OF. If all 3 do, they can trade 1 for a weak spot that doesn't work out.

The Sox for a while have been scared to make these moves. But I think ultimately, we are not winning anything this year or next. Our offense is one of the most pathetic in the league, and we have nothing on the horizon to make it better. At some point, we have to build this thing right.

I hate to admit it, but without bias, If I had to pick between Hahn and Theo, I would take Theo.

Hahn hasn't been on the job long enough for anyone to make any judgments, IMO. I can't say that he's better or worse than Epstein. And regardless, Hoyer is the GM of the Cubs, not Epstein. And I hope people don't mind me calling him Epstein. It baffles me that all of Chicago is on a first-name basis with him.

I guess I'll just be the idiot who doesn't want a five-year rebuilding plan. I don't think much of trading veterans for prospects. For years, I've felt that fans and media and even some baseball executives have overvalued prospects.

I remember WSI having a meltdown the day KW traded Reed, Olivo and Morse for Garcia. "DAMN YOU KENNY! YOU MORTGAGED OUR FUTURE!" Meanwhile, I was crying tears of joy because the Sox were finally acting like a big-market team, acquiring the type of top-of-the-rotation pitcher you need to win a championship.

Texas just made a move similar to the one KW made in 2004. I love the move from the Rangers' perspective. I think they will make the playoffs now. They might even get to the World Series.

Let the Cubs stockpile all these prospects. I still don't know who is going to pitch for them when they are supposedly going to return to contention in 2015. If they aren't contending by then, it will be quite fair to criticize them for trading proven big-league starting pitchers for ifs and maybes.

SCCWS
07-23-2013, 02:52 PM
Hahn hasn't been on the job long enough for anyone to make any judgments, IMO. I can't say that he's better or worse than Epstein. And regardless, Hoyer is the GM of the Cubs, not Epstein. And I hope people don't mind me calling him Epstein. It baffles me that all of Chicago is on a first-name basis with him.

I guess I'll just be the idiot who doesn't want a five-year rebuilding plan. I don't think much of trading veterans for prospects. For years, I've felt that fans and media and even some baseball executives have overvalued prospects.

I remember WSI having a meltdown the day KW traded Reed, Olivo and Morse for Garcia. "DAMN YOU KENNY! YOU MORTGAGED OUR FUTURE!" Meanwhile, I was crying tears of joy because the Sox were finally acting like a big-market team, acquiring the type of top-of-the-rotation pitcher you need to win a championship.

Texas just made a move similar to the one KW made in 2004. I love the move from the Rangers' perspective. I think they will make the playoffs now. They might even get to the World Series.

Let the Cubs stockpile all these prospects. I still don't know who is going to pitch for them when they are supposedly going to return to contention in 2015. If they aren't contending by then, it will be quite fair to criticize them for trading proven big-league starting pitchers for ifs and maybes.

Maybe Theo will use his Boston approach. When the Red Sox won in 2004, most of the roster was acquired via trades and free agency. When they won again in 2007, it was a combination of home grown and acquired pitchers. He went out and got Number 1's such as Pedro, Shilling and Beckett and added young players like Lester, Buccholz, Papelbon

Domeshot17
07-23-2013, 02:53 PM
Hahn hasn't been on the job long enough for anyone to make any judgments, IMO. I can't say that he's better or worse than Epstein. And regardless, Hoyer is the GM of the Cubs, not Epstein. And I hope people don't mind me calling him Epstein. It baffles me that all of Chicago is on a first-name basis with him.

I guess I'll just be the idiot who doesn't want a five-year rebuilding plan. I don't think much of trading veterans for prospects. For years, I've felt that fans and media and even some baseball executives have overvalued prospects.

I remember WSI having a meltdown the day KW traded Reed, Olivo and Morse for Garcia. "DAMN YOU KENNY! YOU MORTGAGED OUR FUTURE!" Meanwhile, I was crying tears of joy because the Sox were finally acting like a big-market team, acquiring the type of top-of-the-rotation pitcher you need to win a championship.

Texas just made a move similar to the one KW made in 2004. I love the move from the Rangers' perspective. I think they will make the playoffs now. They might even get to the World Series.

Let the Cubs stockpile all these prospects. I still don't know who is going to pitch for them when they are supposedly going to return to contention in 2015. If they aren't contending by then, it will be quite fair to criticize them for trading proven big-league starting pitchers for ifs and maybes.

It is all about balance. I think what you will see in 2014 and 2015 especially with the Cubs is having 5-6 GOOD prospects who are up, and having 70-80 million to spend in FA. Because you have cost controlled players around the diamond, you can spend to fill the holes and use excess talent to fill holes via trade.

The Sox have never had balance. Our offense has 2 home grown starters, 1 is finally showing he does not totally suck (Gordon) and the book is out on Josh still.

Honestly, I have no problem with the Sox taking a few years to rebuild. I mean, this season sucks enough as is, might as well make it suck with a good farm. We are going to suck this bad next year, might as well keep getting the farm in order. PK needs to retire, Rios is on the downside of his career, Dunn is done, and none of the younger guys seem like you can really build around them. Gordon has been nice, but FAR from a cornerstone guy.

Put me in the category of wanting a team that wants sustained success. I simply do not enjoy 1 playoff trip every 5 years and justify it because we are .500 most the other years. I want to compete every season, we have the money to do it, we have not had the talent in a long time.

2005 is but a distant memory. Its almost 2015. Its time to win something else.

bestkosher
07-23-2013, 03:07 PM
My question is with Theo's plans, is how does his plan not make him the Royals or Pirates. They have a great prospects year after year and top picks year after year. Great talent in the farm but never do anything with it. Theo has done a Masterful job of marketing his plan but in the end you need a good mix of veteran and youth and right now it is mostly youth he is building his future on.

Domeshot17
07-23-2013, 03:34 PM
My question is with Theo's plans, is how does his plan not make him the Royals or Pirates. They have a great prospects year after year and top picks year after year. Great talent in the farm but never do anything with it. Theo has done a Masterful job of marketing his plan but in the end you need a good mix of veteran and youth and right now it is mostly youth he is building his future on.

Big difference is the market and payroll. The Royals, for example, actually graduated a lot of talent. Where would that team have been if was able to keep together Dye-Damon-Beltran etc. They keep graduating quality players, and seeing them go.

The Cubs, as much as I hate it, seem to be a pretty premier destination for a free agent. Big Market, a ton of national coverage, huge crowds, great city. With a new Wrigley Field, they should be able to keep home grown talent locked up and spend to add additional players.

Golden Sox
07-23-2013, 04:03 PM
I don't see how anybody can pick Epstein over Hahn. This is Hahns first year and lets see how this plays out in another year or two. If I was an owner of a team and my GM signed Edwin Jackson and Castro to big long term contracts like Epstein did, I wouldn't be too happy about it. I still can't figure out why he gave Jackson a 4 year contract worth over $50 million dollars. No other team offered Jackson more than 2 years. Epstein didn't want to give Garza a long term contract but he gave Jackson one. I can't imagine too many people who would take Jackson over Garza. Another of his big contract players, Rizzo isn't exactly tearing up the league. Rizzo can't seem to hit lefties and it looks like he might be a utility player. I do wish that Hahn would do something to change the White Sox offense. The sooner, the better. It's been tough going to these games and seeing this team game after game not hit.

kobo
07-23-2013, 04:15 PM
No question about it. When the Cubs make a move like this, it's regarded as a stroke of genius. If the Sox had made a similar move, they would be declared idiots.

Over the last two summers, the Cubs have dealt four established MLB starters (Dempster, Maholm, Feldman, Garza) for packages of ifs and maybes. Could it work? Sure. It could also fail miserably. I'm just a bit baffled that so many of the writers in this town are convinced each move the Cubs make is going to prove to be brilliant over the long haul. We don't know that yet and we won't know it for years.
It's all because of one name: Theo Epstein.

CoopaLoop
07-23-2013, 07:53 PM
So obsessed with the Cubs we are wondering how people would react if the Sox had got this group of prospects for Peavy?

It's a great haul.

I hope the Sox find a similar package for Peavy.

blandman
07-23-2013, 07:55 PM
So obsessed with the Cubs we are wondering how people would react if the Sox had got this group of prospects for Peavy?

It's a great haul.

I hope the Sox find a similar package for Peavy.

I don't get it either. Grand slams aren't going to happen for these guys. This was a great haul. If we get something similar for Peavy, we should be ecstatic.

Tragg
07-23-2013, 08:17 PM
No question about it. When the Cubs make a move like this, it's regarded as a stroke of genius. If the Sox had made a similar move, they would be declared idiots.

Over the last two summers, the Cubs have dealt four established MLB starters (Dempster, Maholm, Feldman, Garza) for packages of ifs and maybes. Could it work? Sure. It could also fail miserably. I'm just a bit baffled that so many of the writers in this town are convinced each move the Cubs make is going to prove to be brilliant over the long haul. We don't know that yet and we won't know it for years.

Agree - I don't see the great haul here for the Cubs, after I analyze it. Fading top prospect (been there, done that), a #5, possibly #4 starter, and A ball pitchers. Not what I'm looking for for Peavy.

The Cubs probably have a better roster...of course the Sox have been competitive for the last few years too. As for Theo's approach, I don't see how it differs from the Royals. Who are the studs on their ML roster? Rizzo? Uh, okay. Samardzijia? I see 3 equivalents on the Sox and one clearly better. Russel in the pen? He's pretty good. Castro - 3rd year slump. If these team wins in 2015 proceeding on this tract, fantastic for them. I know that a lot of people like this process of building teams....I just don't think it has a high success rate.

JB98
07-24-2013, 12:52 AM
So obsessed with the Cubs we are wondering how people would react if the Sox had got this group of prospects for Peavy?

It's a great haul.

I hope the Sox find a similar package for Peavy.

It's not a matter of being obsessed with the Cubs. Garza was probably the best pitcher available on the trade market. Now that he's off the board, Peavy is probably the best pitcher available.

At this point, it's perfectly reasonable to ask whether the Sox should pull the trigger on a Peavy deal if they get an offer similar to the one the Cubs got for Garza.

My answer is no, because I disagree with the idea that the Cubs got a "great haul." It's only a great haul because "Theo" was the one pulling the trigger on the deal.

JB98
07-24-2013, 12:57 AM
It's all because of one name: Theo Epstein.

Much like Epstein, Andy McPhail rode into Chicago with two World Series under his belt as well. He did nothing with the Cubs.

I know that means nothing for Epstein, but I'm just saying past success is not a guarantee of future performance. There's really a lot of Kool-Aid drinking going on with Epstein. I expect that from Cubs fans, but the media cheerleading has gotten embarrassing. And it's even more embarrassing that some Sox fans are drinking the Kool-Aid as well.

SCCWS
07-24-2013, 01:41 PM
And it's even more embarrassing that some Sox fans are drinking the Kool-Aid as well.

Or some are Cub fans posing as White Sox fans......................

blandman
07-24-2013, 03:19 PM
Or some are Cub fans posing as White Sox fans......................

That's such a ****ing childish attitude.

Keith Law on the prospects in the deal. Insider required. (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/keith-law/post/_/id/985/cubs-do-well-in-matt-garza-deal)

Tragg
07-24-2013, 03:30 PM
That's such a ****ing childish attitude.

Keith Law on the prospects in the deal. Insider required. (http://insider.espn.go.com/blog/keith-law/post/_/id/985/cubs-do-well-in-matt-garza-deal)
Keith Law is in the prospect business and the Rangers are one of his favs. So he needs to be discounted some, imo. He said we should trade Sale straight up for Profar....the dude likes prospects (and yes part of it is he sees Sale as an injury risk, but still that's absurdly low on Sale). And I think Peavy's more valuable in the trade market anyway (BTW, your Starks article didn't say otherwise).

And honestly, for a team that was said to be "Great" 2 years ago (a lot of hyperbole to be sure), and replete with talent on the farm, the Rangers are kind of hurting. They haven't gotten much out of their farm.

Noneck
07-24-2013, 03:35 PM
Much like Epstein, Andy McPhail rode into Chicago with two World Series under his belt as well. He did nothing with the Cubs.

I know that means nothing for Epstein, but I'm just saying past success is not a guarantee of future performance. There's really a lot of Kool-Aid drinking going on with Epstein. I expect that from Cubs fans, but the media cheerleading has gotten embarrassing. And it's even more embarrassing that some Sox fans are drinking the Kool-Aid as well.


Epstein has a honeymoon like Ive never seen before considering the resources behind him. The fans and media are not expecting much till near the end of his contract. Hes in the sweetest spot I can think of.

blandman
07-24-2013, 03:41 PM
Keith Law is in the prospect business and the Rangers are one of his favs. So he needs to be discounted some, imo. He said we should trade Sale straight up for Profar....the dude likes prospects (and yes part of it is he sees Sale as an injury risk, but still that's absurdly low on Sale). And I think Peavy's more valuable in the trade market anyway (BTW, your Starks article didn't say otherwise).

And honestly, for a team that was said to be "Great" 2 years ago (a lot of hyperbole to be sure), and replete with talent on the farm, the Rangers are kind of hurting. They haven't gotten much out of their farm.


My post contained to mostly unrelated ideas, was gonna post Law's opinion either way. I used to hate the guy, as most White Sox fans do, but after a while it became obvious that not only is he right more often that most when it comes to prospects, but he's never been wrong when it comes to us. :shrug:

dickallen15
07-24-2013, 04:15 PM
My post contained to mostly unrelated ideas, was gonna post Law's opinion either way. I used to hate the guy, as most White Sox fans do, but after a while it became obvious that not only is he right more often that most when it comes to prospects, but he's never been wrong when it comes to us. :shrug:
Never? You may want to go back and check what he initially said about Chris Sale.

http://www.southsidesox.com/2011/12/1/2603257/keith-law-still-cannot-admit-he-was-wrong-about-chris-sale

kittle42
07-24-2013, 04:25 PM
Never? You may want to go back and check what he initially said about Chris Sale.

Pwned, as the kids say.

rdivaldi
07-24-2013, 04:25 PM
Keith Law is in the prospect business

He shouldn't be, he's awful...

Domeshot17
07-24-2013, 04:32 PM
He shouldn't be, he's awful...


Ehhh, he is not terrible, but he works for ESPN, so he has to take sides and have wild opinions. Everyone always rails on Law because Law is super tough on the White Sox, but the White Sox farm has been a laughing stock for a long time, and the guys it has produced generally were not home grown, or guys who got a cup of coffee before a call up (Gordon, Sale).

Tragg
07-24-2013, 04:37 PM
My post contained to mostly unrelated ideas, was gonna post Law's opinion either way. I used to hate the guy, as most White Sox fans do, but after a while it became obvious that not only is he right more often that most when it comes to prospects, but he's never been wrong when it comes to us. :shrug:

Did we lose 100+ games last year?
Has Sale been a terrible first round draft choice?

blandman
07-24-2013, 04:44 PM
Did we lose 100+ games last year?
Has Sale been a terrible first round draft choice?

Correction...mostly right. Didn't read that piece on him hating Sale for breaking ball reasons. Knew about the injury stuff, but talking about that isn't going to add anything good to the conversation. :tongue:

Did he predict 100+ losses for us last year? Maybe he was just a year early?

soxfanreggie
07-24-2013, 05:00 PM
Agree - I don't see the great haul here for the Cubs, after I analyze it. Fading top prospect (been there, done that), a #5, possibly #4 starter, and A ball pitchers. Not what I'm looking for for Peavy.

The Cubs probably have a better roster...of course the Sox have been competitive for the last few years too. As for Theo's approach, I don't see how it differs from the Royals. Who are the studs on their ML roster? Rizzo? Uh, okay. Samardzijia? I see 3 equivalents on the Sox and one clearly better. Russel in the pen? He's pretty good. Castro - 3rd year slump. If these team wins in 2015 proceeding on this tract, fantastic for them. I know that a lot of people like this process of building teams....I just don't think it has a high success rate.

I'm looking for Peavy to actually pitch an entire season, something we haven't seen much of during his tenure with the Sox. Do you honestly think he'll be healthy all of 2014? Even if he is, do you think we'll have enough to seriously contend in 2014?

rdivaldi
07-24-2013, 05:37 PM
but he works for ESPN

That pretty much sums it up.

I have never found any of his write-ups to be particularly insightful, nor do I find his scouting to be anything more than ordinary.

DSpivack
07-24-2013, 05:40 PM
I'm looking for Peavy to actually pitch an entire season, something we haven't seen much of during his tenure with the Sox. Do you honestly think he'll be healthy all of 2014? Even if he is, do you think we'll have enough to seriously contend in 2014?

You mean like 32 starts and 219 IP, as he did last season?

Mr. Jinx
07-24-2013, 05:55 PM
You mean like 32 starts and 219 IP, as he did last season?

And that would be the only year out of the 4 that he has been with us that he was healthy all season. I think that's enough to say we haven't seen that all that much.

DSpivack
07-24-2013, 07:42 PM
And that would be the only year out of the 4 that he has been with us that he was healthy all season. I think that's enough to say we haven't seen that all that much.

He has actually pitched an entire season for the Sox, though. That's all.

doublem23
07-25-2013, 09:28 AM
That pretty much sums it up.

I have never found any of his write-ups to be particularly insightful, nor do I find his scouting to be anything more than ordinary.

Keith Law is a smart guy and he knows his role at ESPN is to write inflammatory bull**** to generate pageviews and Insider subscriptions. I sincerely have a hard time believing he genuinely thinks what he writes most of the time. It's easy to not take him very seriously, not just because of his obvious vendetta against the Sox (though, proclaiming their farm system bad the last few years isn't exactly going out on a limb there), it's just because of his super aggressive, in your face kind of attitude when even a casual baseball observer can see that anyone who thinks they have an infallible opinion when it comes to baseball prospects is crazy.

That said, if Law was half as good of a talent evaluator as he thinks he is, he wouldn't be buried behind a paywall at ESPN.

CoopaLoop
07-25-2013, 10:23 PM
It's not a matter of being obsessed with the Cubs. Garza was probably the best pitcher available on the trade market. Now that he's off the board, Peavy is probably the best pitcher available.

At this point, it's perfectly reasonable to ask whether the Sox should pull the trigger on a Peavy deal if they get an offer similar to the one the Cubs got for Garza.

My answer is no, because I disagree with the idea that the Cubs got a "great haul." It's only a great haul because "Theo" was the one pulling the trigger on the deal.

This is a fun thing to throw around instead of backing up your position.

JB98
07-26-2013, 01:09 AM
This is a fun thing to throw around instead of backing up your position.

In this trade, the Cubs received:
1. A 3B who is hitting .213 with 92 Ks in 273 ABs at AAA.
2. A second-year pro who has never pitched above A-ball.
3. A starting pitcher who had an ERA over 6 in 17 starts with Texas.

This is a "great haul" for what reason? I believe the onus is on you to prove your point.

TheVulture
07-26-2013, 05:14 PM
In this trade, the Cubs received:
1. A 3B who is hitting .213 with 92 Ks in 273 ABs at AAA.
2. A second-year pro who has never pitched above A-ball.
3. A starting pitcher who had an ERA over 6 in 17 starts with Texas.

This is a "great haul" for what reason? I believe the onus is on you to prove your point.

I don't know whether this is a great haul or a crap haul, but as to points two and three:

2) Doesn't mean anything. At one point, Randy Johnson and Greg Maddux were second year pros who had never pitched above A-ball.

3) Again, doesn't really mean anything other than the starting pitcher has struggled in his first taste at MLB. Doesn't say much about whether he'll be any good 2-5 years from now. The guy they traded away for these prospects was pretty bad in his first call up as well, granted over only 9 starts.

kittle42
07-26-2013, 05:47 PM
2) Doesn't mean anything. At one point, Randy Johnson and Greg Maddux were second year pros who had never pitched above A-ball.

By that logic, obtaining any low-level prospect is a great move, because they could become a HOFer.

TheVulture
07-26-2013, 06:21 PM
By that logic, obtaining any low-level prospect is a great move, because they could become a HOFer.

Doesn't mean anything

Maybe I'm not much of a logician, but I'm not sure how you could logically turn "doesn't mean anything" into "obtaining any low-level prospect is a great move".

CoopaLoop
07-26-2013, 07:16 PM
In this trade, the Cubs received:
1. A 3B who is hitting .213 with 92 Ks in 273 ABs at AAA.
2. A second-year pro who has never pitched above A-ball.
3. A starting pitcher who had an ERA over 6 in 17 starts with Texas.

This is a "great haul" for what reason? I believe the onus is on you to prove your point.

1) Is a guy who has battle vision problems all season. If you want to say a former top prospect is now a bum because of a 273 at bat sample size during which he has had to see multiple eye specialists, go ahead. I am going to say he is much closer to the guy who did this the three years prior:
.293/.390/.464
.264/.381/.500
.288/.398/.579

Not like this guy was trending downward before the season started.

2) Sure he's a low A prospect but he's got good stuff and in a limited sample size has been great. He's got a plus fastball and a plus curve ball.

3) Grimm is just a major league body, not worth mentioning. But I believe the Cubs will be receiving Neil Ramirez as the Player to be named later.

I will be thrilled if we can bring back a potential impact player of Olt's caliber in a Peavy trade.

rdivaldi
07-26-2013, 08:59 PM
I will be thrilled if we can bring back a potential impact player of Olt's caliber in a Peavy trade.

A 24/25 year-old prospect that projects to be a low average, high K, all or nothing hitter? Yeah, I'm sure we'd all be thrilled.

kittle42
07-26-2013, 11:18 PM
Maybe I'm not much of a logician, but I'm not sure how you could logically turn "doesn't mean anything" into "obtaining any low-level prospect is a great move".

You conveniently ignored this part: "At one point, Randy Johnson and Greg Maddux were second year pros who had never pitched above A-ball."

I can easily turn that into "any prospect can turn into a hall of fame pitcher."

JB98
07-27-2013, 12:21 AM
1) Is a guy who has battle vision problems all season. If you want to say a former top prospect is now a bum because of a 273 at bat sample size during which he has had to see multiple eye specialists, go ahead. I am going to say he is much closer to the guy who did this the three years prior:
.293/.390/.464
.264/.381/.500
.288/.398/.579

Not like this guy was trending downward before the season started.

2) Sure he's a low A prospect but he's got good stuff and in a limited sample size has been great. He's got a plus fastball and a plus curve ball.

3) Grimm is just a major league body, not worth mentioning. But I believe the Cubs will be receiving Neil Ramirez as the Player to be named later.

I will be thrilled if we can bring back a potential impact player of Olt's caliber in a Peavy trade.

That makes one of us. If Hahn adds another all-or-nothing "prospect" to this organization in exchange for Peavy, the pitchforks and torches will be out. And rightfully so.

CoopaLoop
07-27-2013, 11:04 AM
A .390 OBP in the minors is all or nothing.


alrighty then.

JB98
07-27-2013, 01:57 PM
A .390 OBP in the minors is all or nothing.


alrighty then.

He strikes out once every 3.8 plate appearances against minor-league pitching.

Adam Dunn has struck out once every 3.5 plate appearances during his career, but at least that was against MLB pitching.

And Olt's career OBP is .374, not .390. These statistics are readily available and not hard to look up.

getonbckthr
07-27-2013, 02:08 PM
He strikes out once every 3.8 plate appearances against minor-league pitching.

Adam Dunn has struck out once every 3.5 plate appearances during his career, but at least that was against MLB pitching.

And Olt's career OBP is .374, not .390. These statistics are readily available and not hard to look up.
Just curious did he strikeout as often before the eye issues?

mzh
07-27-2013, 02:28 PM
Just curious did he strikeout as often before the eye issues?
His K rate this season is 33%, about 27% on his career, so not a particularly large jump that could also be attributed to moving up a couple levels.

CoopaLoop
07-27-2013, 03:25 PM
He strikes out once every 3.8 plate appearances against minor-league pitching.

Adam Dunn has struck out once every 3.5 plate appearances during his career, but at least that was against MLB pitching.

And Olt's career OBP is .374, not .390. These statistics are readily available and not hard to look up.

I just gave you the last three years of his OBP before this season pal. Like I said if you would like to keep lumping in a season where he couldn't see to the rest of his career, feel free. I will not.

JB98
07-28-2013, 12:28 AM
I just gave you the last three years of his OBP before this season pal. Like I said if you would like to keep lumping in a season where he couldn't see to the rest of his career, feel free. I will not.

First off, I'm not your pal.

Secondly, Dunn's career OBP is .367. Everyone wants him gone for being an all-or-nothing hitter. Olt's OBP is .374. That doesn't mean he isn't all-or-nothing. His OBP is very similar to Dunn's.

At least Dunn's massive K totals are against legitimate MLB pitchers.

Olt is whiffing like a madman in the minors. I already cited the stat that proves it. I'm sorry if you can't read. He sucks. I don't want any more hitters like him in our system. I'd much rather hold on to Peavy than trade for a piece of crap like that.

Go ahead and keep believing the propaganda about the Cubs, though. They're great. Just ask them.

doublem23
07-28-2013, 12:44 AM
I just gave you the last three years of his OBP before this season pal. Like I said if you would like to keep lumping in a season where he couldn't see to the rest of his career, feel free. I will not.

The counter to this is that the majority of Olt's minor league playing time was in Frisco, in the notoriously hitter-friendly Texas League. His MILB career OBP at every level other than AA is in the .360s. Not bad, but far from elite status.

Tragg
07-28-2013, 01:31 AM
I just gave you the last three years of his OBP before this season pal. Like I said if you would like to keep lumping in a season where he couldn't see to the rest of his career, feel free. I will not.

He was a top prospect last year at this time, but he suffered a bad injury and hasn't really recovered. You've got to discount him from last year when evaluating the package.
And high K totals in the minors often portend problems hitting ML pitching.
I don't want any part of Middlebrooks for that reason.

CoopaLoop
07-28-2013, 08:58 PM
First off, I'm not your pal.

Secondly, Dunn's career OBP is .367. Everyone wants him gone for being an all-or-nothing hitter. Olt's OBP is .374. That doesn't mean he isn't all-or-nothing. His OBP is very similar to Dunn's.

At least Dunn's massive K totals are against legitimate MLB pitchers.

Olt is whiffing like a madman in the minors. I already cited the stat that proves it. I'm sorry if you can't read. He sucks. I don't want any more hitters like him in our system. I'd much rather hold on to Peavy than trade for a piece of crap like that.

Go ahead and keep believing the propaganda about the Cubs, though. They're great. Just ask them.

They are better than us record wise right now and have a brighter future.

As for mentioning Dunn's career OBP and saying people here want him gone. That is just asinine. His OBP as a member of the White Sox has been .292 .333 and .319. Lol what a silly thing to say. These numbers aren't hard to look up.

CoopaLoop
07-28-2013, 09:00 PM
The counter to this is that the majority of Olt's minor league playing time was in Frisco, in the notoriously hitter-friendly Texas League. His MILB career OBP at every level other than AA is in the .360s. Not bad, but far from elite status.

That is an actual fair point to make.

TheVulture
07-31-2013, 01:28 AM
You conveniently ignored this part: "At one point, Randy Johnson and Greg Maddux were second year pros who had never pitched above A-ball."

I can easily turn that into "any prospect can turn into a hall of fame pitcher."

Sigh...

That's not logical, because my claim was "it doesn't mean anything". "Randy Johnson and Greg Maddux were 2nd year pros..." was only the support to that claim that it doesn't mean anything. It only shows that a 2d year A ball player can range from a player who never makes it past A ball to a hall of fame player, therefore "it doesn't mean anything" that a prospect is a 2d year player in A ball when evaluating a prospect.


You can't logically say that because I used that example to disprove the claim that it does mean something that you can easily turn that into any prospect can turn into a hall of fame pitcher. That's just ludicrously fallacious reasoning, no offense.

JB98
08-03-2013, 02:09 PM
They are better than us record wise right now and have a brighter future.

As for mentioning Dunn's career OBP and saying people here want him gone. That is just asinine. His OBP as a member of the White Sox has been .292 .333 and .319. Lol what a silly thing to say. These numbers aren't hard to look up.

Your guy Olt is 4-for-41 with 14Ks in his first 10 games with Iowa. If this player had been acquired by the White Sox for Peavy, there would be riots in the streets.

On the bright side, Olt has walked twice, so his OBP is all the way up to .146 now.

I stand by everything I said. We have enough hitters like Olt in our organization. I'm glad he's a Cubbie and not a White Sox.

DrCrawdad
08-04-2013, 12:09 PM
First off, I'm not your pal.

Secondly, Dunn's career OBP is .367. Everyone wants him gone for being an all-or-nothing hitter. Olt's OBP is .374. That doesn't mean he isn't all-or-nothing. His OBP is very similar to Dunn's.

At least Dunn's massive K totals are against legitimate MLB pitchers.

Olt is whiffing like a madman in the minors. I already cited the stat that proves it. I'm sorry if you can't read. He sucks. I don't want any more hitters like him in our system. I'd much rather hold on to Peavy than trade for a piece of crap like that.

Go ahead and keep believing the propaganda about the Cubs, though. They're great. Just ask them.

LOL! I'm loving this discussion and the posters involved, as per usual.

http://www.admavericks.com/wp-content/uploads/im-lovin-it.jpeg

rdivaldi
08-15-2013, 10:41 AM
Your guy Olt is 4-for-41 with 14Ks in his first 10 games with Iowa. If this player had been acquired by the White Sox for Peavy, there would be riots in the streets.

Now down to .133 in 20 games but his OBP has soared to .188

JB98
08-15-2013, 01:40 PM
Now down to .133 in 20 games but his OBP has soared to .188

Yeah, the dude is a reclamation project. Maybe he bounces back next year. Maybe. I just can't for the life of me understand why anyone would think Olt is part of a "great haul" the Cubs supposedly got for Garza. He's a soon-to-be-25-year-old who is really struggling at AAA.

The Cubs need that Edwards kid to work out to make the deal worthwhile, IMO.

Smokey Burg
08-16-2013, 10:55 PM
Typical. Throughout my life (55 yrs) I've seen the cubs trade prime players for washouts and "prospects". Usually, the prospects win a world series with another club. Oh well, last year Theo stated that the cubs should be competitive in 2015.

CoopaLoop
08-17-2013, 03:00 AM
lol if Olt does this next year, you can run me into the ground. Fun with sample sizes!

blandman
08-17-2013, 09:35 AM
lol if Olt does this next year, you can run me into the ground. Fun with sample sizes!

He has been about as horrible as possible since the trade and physically he's fine now. You're right, give him another year to recover just to be sure but it doesn't look all that likely at this point.

SoxSpeed22
08-17-2013, 12:56 PM
Something I didn't know was that Olt had a concussion from winter league, which led to his eye issues. I am not sure if he will "make it back" this year, he will still have to get his timing back. Or maybe the fear is there, who knows.

TaylorStSox
08-17-2013, 01:18 PM
Something I didn't know was that Olt had a concussion from winter league, which led to his eye issues. I am not sure if he will "make it back" this year, he will still have to get his timing back. Or maybe the fear is there, who knows.

Morneau has never been the same. This is the reason Olt's value dropped significantly. When the Sox were rumored to be talking to the Rangers about Peavy, most if the prospect guys wanted nothing to do with Olt.

JB98
08-17-2013, 01:46 PM
Morneau has never been the same. This is the reason Olt's value dropped significantly. When the Sox were rumored to be talking to the Rangers about Peavy, most if the prospect guys wanted nothing to do with Olt.

Next year will be the tell on Olt, for sure. He's been beyond horrible this year. There are bad years, and then there's falling off a cliff. Olt has fallen off a cliff. He might find it again, but it's probably at least 50/50 that he's done.

Honestly, I don't know why the Cubs acquired him. I thought they drafted their 3B of the future earlier this year. Why would they need Olt? And why did so many in the media consider the Garza trade a stroke of brilliance?

It's a fine trade if that Edwards kid works out for them, but we won't know that for a couple years.

rdivaldi
08-18-2013, 09:37 AM
And why did so many in the media consider the Garza trade a stroke of brilliance?

One word, "hype".

DrCrawdad
08-18-2013, 01:52 PM
Next year will be the tell on Olt, for sure. He's been beyond horrible this year. There are bad years, and then there's falling off a cliff. Olt has fallen off a cliff. He might find it again, but it's probably at least 50/50 that he's done.

Honestly, I don't know why the Cubs acquired him. I thought they drafted their 3B of the future earlier this year. Why would they need Olt? And why did so many in the media consider the Garza trade a stroke of brilliance?

It's a fine trade if that Edwards kid works out for them, but we won't know that for a couple years.

Theo & company have there fanboys in the media and other places...Theo & company are better than everyone else, smarter than everyone else, just ask their fanboys.

Tragg
08-18-2013, 03:16 PM
All I've got to say is that I'll take Garcia over Olt and the AA pitcher, even without the comfort that Theo affirmed the trade.

JB98
08-18-2013, 05:22 PM
All I've got to say is that I'll take Garcia over Olt and the AA pitcher, even without the comfort that Theo affirmed the trade.

Agreed. When Garcia was with Detroit, I said to myself, "I wish we had a young outfielder as talented as that guy." Well, now we do have him. Hopefully, his power develops. That's the main thing that is missing. I'm optimistic it will. Maybe he won't be a 30-HR guy, but I think he has the potential to hit 20-25 a year.

blandman
08-18-2013, 05:59 PM
Agreed. When Garcia was with Detroit, I said to myself, "I wish we had a young outfielder as talented as that guy." Well, now we do have him. Hopefully, his power develops. That's the main thing that is missing. I'm optimistic it will. Maybe he won't be a 30-HR guy, but I think he has the potential to hit 20-25 a year.

:o: What now? Garcia's a 65 in power with potential to go higher. He's gonna hit homers in bunches. Contact is his issue.

Tragg
08-18-2013, 06:37 PM
Agree with Bland.
The dude is shooting line drives and not over-swinging. He needs to stay that way. He even has a decent batting eye it seems to me, which is unusual for someone who struck out so much. But looking good right now.

JB98
08-19-2013, 03:16 PM
:o: What now? Garcia's a 65 in power with potential to go higher. He's gonna hit homers in bunches. Contact is his issue.

He has two home runs in 180 MLB plate appearances. The power hasn't come yet. I think it will.

Tragg
08-24-2013, 11:17 AM
Cubbies are still talking about their haul over on mlbtraderumors. They even have the Rangers fans convinced they were fleeced.