PDA

View Full Version : Cubs close to trading for Matt Garza



Dan
01-05-2011, 09:44 AM
MLBTR Link (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/01/cubs-close-to-trading-for-matt-garza.html?utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=twitterfeed)


The Cubs are close to trading for Rays righty Matt Garza, reports Gordon Wittenmyer of the Chicago Sun-Times.

klw
01-05-2011, 01:15 PM
10:53am: Major League sources tell David Kaplan of CSNChicago.com that the teams have discussed Garza, but other names have not been exchanged. Though the Cubs are willing to part with talent for the right-hander, the Rays would have to be overwhelmed to move him, Kaplan reports.
from www.mlbtraderumors.com

or not so close

LoganBuck
01-05-2011, 03:35 PM
Seriously if the Cubs deal for him, with the slop that they have in their farm system I am going to be mad.

Razor Shines
01-05-2011, 03:45 PM
I'm sure the Reds could trump a Cubs offer but maybe the Reds don't want to add him to the payroll. What's Garza going to get in arbitration this year, $5-6M??? I'd love for the Reds to get Garza and I'm sure the FO would also, maybe they just don't have the money?

PuffyPig
01-05-2011, 04:51 PM
I'm sure the Reds could trump a Cubs offer but maybe the Reds don't want to add him to the payroll. What's Garza going to get in arbitration this year, $5-6M??? I'd love for the Reds to get Garza and I'm sure the FO would also, maybe they just don't have the money?


He's getting expensive and trending down over the last few years.

His K rate is going down, he throws more FB's every year, his xFIP was 4.51 last year.

This just might be a case of the Rays trading a player at his peak of value.

He's an OK pitcher, but I don't see a whole lot of difference between him and what we already got.

Reds Freak
01-05-2011, 05:03 PM
He's getting expensive and trending down over the last few years.

His K rate is going down, he throws more FB's every year, his xFIP was 4.51 last year.

This just might be a case of the Rays trading a player at his peak of value.

He's an OK pitcher, but I don't see a whole lot of difference between him and what we already got.

He's a bit of a nut case too isn't he? Garza and Zambrano would make for an interesting combo...

Dan
01-07-2011, 11:45 AM
MLBTR Link (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/01/cubs-rays-working-on-garza-trade.html?utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=twitterfeed)


The Cubs are discussing a potential Matt Garza trade with the Rays, according to Bruce Miles of the Daily Herald. The Cubs are getting set to send Chris Archer, Hak-Ju Lee, Brandon Guyer and Robinson Chirinos to the Rays, according to Miles. There may be additional parts to the deal for each team, Miles reports.

Basically looks like Boxberger, Nigron, Sappelt, and Frazier for Garza+.

lollipopcurve
01-07-2011, 11:55 AM
Basically looks like Boxberger, Nigron, Sappelt, and Frazier for Garza+.

I have to think the Cubs package is quite a bit better. Using Baseball America rankings, you list 1 Reds top 10 guy -- Frazier at #9. Cubs package includes their #1, #4 and #10.

Edd Roush
01-07-2011, 12:21 PM
I have to think the Cubs package is quite a bit better. Using Baseball America rankings, you list 1 Reds top 10 guy -- Frazier at #9. Cubs package includes their #1, #4 and #10.

Agreed. That looks like quite the haul. I think the Rays win that deal.

Homer Bailey
01-07-2011, 12:31 PM
Man, the NL Central farm systems are going to be embarassing if this deal goes through.

Tommyjohn25
01-07-2011, 12:31 PM
The Cubs need a WHOLE lot more than Matt Garza to save their team. If they pull the trigger on that they just set themselves back even further, IMO. Fine with me.

Redsfan320
01-07-2011, 02:02 PM
Now MLBTR saying that Fernando Perez (OF-TB) is also going to the Cubs.

320

redsfandan
01-07-2011, 02:03 PM
On November 28, 2007, the Rays traded (Delmon) Young, along with Brendan Harris and Jason Pridie, to the Minnesota Twins for Jason Bartlett, Matt Garza, and Eduardo Morlan.[14]

And now Tampa has traded away both Bartlett and Garza for a bunch of prospects. Two players that were about to be replaced anyway for alot of cheap players with potential to help down the road. For teams that don't have a lot of money to work with that makes alot of sense.

Will M
01-07-2011, 02:07 PM
I have to think the Cubs package is quite a bit better. Using Baseball America rankings, you list 1 Reds top 10 guy -- Frazier at #9. Cubs package includes their #1, #4 and #10.

However, how good is the Cubs system? Their #4 prospect could have a ceiling of a backup waterboy.

RedsManRick
01-07-2011, 02:16 PM
Another NL Central team gives up a big package of prospects. At least Milwaukee got impact in return. Garza is a mid-rotation guy whom them Cubs didn't really need.

I really like how the Reds are positioned for the next 3-4 years.

edabbs44
01-07-2011, 02:19 PM
Another NL Central team gives up a big package of prospects. At least Milwaukee got impact in return. Garza is a mid-rotation guy whom them Cubs didn't really need.

I really like how the Reds are positioned for the next 3-4 years.

Yeah, sitting on our prospects for the past 5 years looks better and better.

lollipopcurve
01-07-2011, 02:22 PM
However, how good is the Cubs system? Their #4 prospect could have a ceiling of a backup waterboy.

Per BA, they're neck and neck with the Reds.

Will M
01-07-2011, 02:37 PM
Per BA, they're neck and neck with the Reds.

fair enough.

if so then IMO they way way overpaid for Garza.

redsfandan
01-07-2011, 02:48 PM
Per BA, they're neck and neck with the Reds.

So, they have 4-6 of the top 100 prospects in baseball? Really?

blumj
01-07-2011, 03:19 PM
Garza always sort of reminded me of Beckett, the stuff looks like he should be unhittable, and he is, for stretches, right up until he gets lit up like crazy out of the blue. Also, he's a spit factory.

I(heart)Freel
01-07-2011, 03:40 PM
Interesting read, especially in light of the Reds' reluctance to trade their prospects.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/Cubs-trade-for-Matt-Garza-doesn-t-stink-but-its?urn=mlb-304746

Patience really is a virtue. During an off season when so many on this board (myself included) scream for SOMEONE! ANYONE! in a trade to improve the big league team, the prudent thing to do for now and for the future is to sit and wait.

It's not a sexy stance, especially on a fan message board in the dead of winter, but maybe it's the right play. Articles like this remind of that.

lollipopcurve
01-07-2011, 04:32 PM
So, they have 4-6 of the top 100 prospects in baseball? Really?

All I can tell you is that Jim Callis said recently that the talent in the two organizations was comparable. Maybe they think the Reds have more high-end talent and the Cubs have more depth, I don't know...

New Fever
01-07-2011, 04:39 PM
All I can tell you is that Jim Callis said recently that the talent in the two organizations was comparable. Maybe they think the Reds have more high-end talent and the Cubs have more depth, I don't know...

No, they said that the Reds have more high-end talent and more depth.

lollipopcurve
01-07-2011, 05:05 PM
No, they said that the Reds have more high-end talent and more depth.

Here's what Jim Callis wrote...




bubblesdachimp (DC): Do the Cubs have the best farm system in the NL central right now?

Jim Callis: Neck and neck with the Reds.


In his view, the two orgs have similar talent. Take it for what it's worth.

camisadelgolf
01-07-2011, 05:11 PM
Here's what Jim Callis wrote...





In his view, the two orgs have similar talent. Take it for what it's worth.
I'm wondering if there's a bias involved. Callis has lived in Chicago for years.

TheNext44
01-07-2011, 05:47 PM
Here's what Jim Callis wrote...


In his view, the two orgs have similar talent. Take it for what it's worth.

they might overall have similar talent, but none of the guys the Cubs gave up for Garza would be in the Reds top 5. Most of them, if not all of them are more like the Reds #10-20 prospects than top 12.

lollipopcurve
01-07-2011, 06:16 PM
they might overall have similar talent, but none of the guys the Cubs gave up for Garza would be in the Reds top 5. Most of them, if not all of them are more like the Reds #10-20 prospects than top 12.

Purely a matter of personal opinion, of course. I might agree with you, but Baseball America would not. Again, FWIW.

New Fever
01-08-2011, 01:53 AM
Here's what Jim Callis wrote...





In his view, the two orgs have similar talent. Take it for what it's worth.

Yea, their comments were confusing to me because in the Reds chat J.J. Copper said that their staff believes that the Reds have better depth. Also there is no way the Cubs have 6 Top 100 players in their system.

Jake (Idaho): Yesterday, Jim Callis told us the Cubs and Reds farm systems were neck-and-neck in the NL Central. That said, did the Reds rank above the Cubs overall?

J.J. Cooper: We have our initial rankings in the Handbook (have to wait for it to come out to see those) and we haven't set our final Organization talent rankings, but in my personal opinion, the Reds are slightly better because of better depth.

TheNext44
01-08-2011, 02:33 AM
Yea, their comments were confusing to me because in the Reds chat J.J. Copper said that their staff believes that the Reds have better depth. Also there is no way the Cubs have 6 Top 100 players in their system.

Jake (Idaho): Yesterday, Jim Callis told us the Cubs and Reds farm systems were neck-and-neck in the NL Central. That said, did the Reds rank above the Cubs overall?

J.J. Cooper: We have our initial rankings in the Handbook (have to wait for it to come out to see those) and we haven't set our final Organization talent rankings, but in my personal opinion, the Reds are slightly better because of better depth.

Thanks for the find.

It is puzzling, since that implies that the Cubs and Reds have the same number and caliber of high level talent in their systems.

But the Reds should have 3 guys in the top 50, and one guy in the top 10, while it's doubtful that more than one of the Cubs prospects cracks the top 50.

It's kinda a moot point now anyway, since after this trade, the Cubs have much less depth than the Reds.

redsfandan
01-08-2011, 03:17 AM
Thanks for the find.

It is puzzling, since that implies that the Cubs and Reds have the same number and caliber of high level talent in their systems.

But the Reds should have 3 guys in the top 50, and one guy in the top 10, while it's doubtful that more than one of the Cubs prospects cracks the top 50.

It's kinda a moot point now anyway, since after this trade, the Cubs have much less depth than the Reds.

Well, I think there were at least a couple people here that were hoping that the Reds acquired Garza. And maybe they could've acquired him while still holding onto the gems of the system (the top 6).

mth123
01-08-2011, 03:54 AM
Well, I think there were at least a couple people here that were hoping that the Reds acquired Garza. And maybe they could've acquired him while still holding onto the gems of the system (the top 6).

I don't think that the Reds could have acquired Garza for the same reason that they couldn't acquire Greinke even if the money could work. The Reds simply don't have a SS prospect in the upper levels of the caliber of Escobar or Lee and they weren't getting either of them without one.

Personally, I think Garza is taken too lightly here. He has high caliber stuff. He's probably not as good as Greinke, but he is a solid pitcher that a play-off caliber team would do well to throw out there in a play-off series. Many guys are labeled as a number two or three starter, but teams would probably prefer having alternatives to them in a post season game. The Cubs gave up a lot (Lee and Archer alone probably top the package that Milwaukee sent to KC), but they improved their major league team a lot with this deal and Starlin Castro made Lee expendable.

Scrap Irony
01-08-2011, 04:33 AM
mth, I cannot for the life of me understand how you like Garza as a TOR starter, but not the Reds starters.

Cincinnati has three guys I'd take right now over Garza and two more I could be tempted to take, when considering cash and prospects involved.

mth123
01-08-2011, 05:23 AM
mth, I cannot for the life of me understand how you like Garza as a TOR starter, but not the Reds starters.

Cincinnati has three guys I'd take right now over Garza and two more I could be tempted to take, when considering cash and prospects involved.

Lets see, in 2008 Garza threw 184 innings with a 3.70 ERA, in 2009, 203 innings of 3.95 ERA and 2010 204 IP of 3.91 ERA. He did all this in the AL east facing the Yankees. Red Sox and even Jays, who have a decent offense, a whole lot of times and dealing with line-ups that don't have the free out known as the pitcher's spot.

How does that compare:

Edinson Volquez - never reached 200 IP. Had a great half a season in 2008 followed by a poor second half and a major arm injury and hasn't really established himself since.

Mike Leake - 75 IP with TOR results when no one knew anything about him and everyone was taking strike one and falling behind, followed by 60 innings of being a batting tee and an early season's end with talk of an arm injury.

Homer Bailey - never thrown 120 major league innings in a season. Never had an ERA below 4.46 and missed three months last year with shoulder problems.

Travis Wood - 102 Major league innings with promise. If he turns out like Garza I'll be pretty happy. Lets see how the league adjusts and he counters and get back to me after he's done it for 3 full years.

Johnny Cueto - never a 200 IP season and only one with an ERA below 4.00 even with the advantage of facing the pitcher and a weak division most of the time.

Bronson Arroyo - has been up and down and I like him more than many do, but he does have a shrinking K-Rate and is most likely to put an ERA in 4.20 to 4.40 range. I like Arroyo a lot and his IP, even if he winds up with a 4.40 ERA, are very valuable, but he's not as good as Garza, he's 34 in 2011 and he's expensive.

Sometimes we dig so deep we don't see what is right in front of us. If any of the Reds 6 rotation candidates have a year anything like any of Garza'a last three, I'll be very happy. I'm pretty sure a couple of them will (not as sure I can identify who exactly) and hope that 5 of them will, but if I had to make a choice I couldn't say pitcher X in the Reds rotation will have a year like that. I'm pretty confident that Garza will produce another year like that though, so yeah, at this point, I like him better.

TheNext44
01-08-2011, 05:46 AM
Lets see, in 2008 Garza threw 184 innings with a 3.70 ERA, in 2009, 203 innings of 3.95 ERA and 2010 204 IP of 3.91 ERA. He did all this in the AL east facing the Yankees. Red Sox and even Jays, who have a decent offense, a whole lot of times and dealing with line-ups that don't have the free out known as the pitcher's spot.

How does that compare:

Edinson Volquez - never reached 200 IP. Had a great half a season in 2008 followed by a poor second half and a major arm injury and hasn't really established himself since.

Mike Leake - 75 IP with TOR results when no one knew anything about him and everyone was taking strike one and falling behind, followed by 60 innings of being a batting tee and an early season's end with talk of an arm injury.

Homer Bailey - never thrown 120 major league innings in a season. Never had an ERA below 4.46 and missed three months last year with shoulder problems.

Travis Wood - 102 Major league innings with promise. If he turns out like Garza I'll be pretty happy. Lets see how the league adjusts and he counters and get back to me after he's done it for 3 full years.

Johnny Cueto - never a 200 IP season and only one with an ERA below 4.00 even with the advantage of facing the pitcher and a weak division most of the time.

Bronson Arroyo - has been up and down and I like him more than many do, but he does have a shrinking K-Rate and is most likely to put an ERA in 4.20 to 4.40 range. I like Arroyo a lot and his IP, even if he winds up with a 4.40 ERA, are very valuable, but he's not as good as Garza, he's 34 in 2011 and he's expensive.

Sometimes we dig so deep we don't see what is right in front of us. If any of the Reds 6 rotation candidates have a year anything like any of Garza'a last three, I'll be very happy. I'm pretty sure a couple of them will (not as sure I can identify who exactly) and hope that 5 of them will, but if I had to make a choice I couldn't say pitcher X in the Reds rotation will have a year like that. I'm pretty confident that Garza will produce another year like that though, so yeah, at this point, I like him better.

Thats a solid analysis, pretty spot on. But basically, Garza has a better chance of having a solid year because he is older and more experienced than any of the Reds starters besides Arroyo. But he's really not any better. He has TOR stuff, but also some issues that currently keep him from being one. Just like most of the Reds starters.

mth123
01-08-2011, 06:02 AM
Thats a solid analysis, pretty spot on. But basically, Garza has a better chance of having a solid year because he is older and more experienced than any of the Reds starters besides Arroyo. But he's really not any better. He has TOR stuff, but also some issues that currently keep him from being one. Just like most of the Reds starters.

Garza is actually 6 months younger than Edinson Volquez who many project as the Reds future ace.

redsfandan
01-08-2011, 07:43 AM
I don't think that the Reds could have acquired Garza for the same reason that they couldn't acquire Greinke even if the money could work. The Reds simply don't have a SS prospect in the upper levels of the caliber of Escobar or Lee and they weren't getting either of them without one.

Maybe, just maybe, they would've had interest in a certain 1st baseman that's blocked.

mth123
01-08-2011, 07:56 AM
Maybe, just maybe, they would've had interest in a certain 1st baseman that's blocked.

Maybe a deal for Alonso would interest them, but 1B are plentiful. Alonso is a decent prospect, but there are 5 or 6 other prospects who either play 1B or possibly will end up there who are probably better (Hosmer, Belt, Freeman, Montero, Harper, Norris). Add that to established 1B around the leagues (Pujols, Votto, Texiera, Fielder, Howard, Konerko/Dunn, Gonzalez, Helton), young major leaguers (Davis, Smoak, Barton, Morales) the interchangebale glut available for no talent each season (Lee, Laroche, Overbay, Pena, Huff, Berkman, etc.) and its hard to give up a ton of talent for a guy like Alonso who may end up nothing more than one of the pack as a hitter as 1B go. I can't see a team giving up a solid starter for him unless its to dump salary.

redsfandan
01-08-2011, 08:05 AM
Maybe a deal for Alonso would interest them, but 1B are plentiful. Alonso is a decent prospect, but there are 5 or 6 other prospects who either play 1B or possibly will end up there who are probably better (Hosmer, Belt, Freeman, Montero, Harper, Norris). Add that to established 1B around the leagues (Pujols, Votto, Texiera, Fielder, Howard, Konerko/Dunn, Gonzalez, Helton), young major leaguers (Davis, Smoak, Barton, Morales) the interchangebale glut available for no talent each season (Lee, Laroche, Overbay, Pena, Huff, Berkman, etc.) and its hard to give up a ton of talent for a guy like Alonso who may end up nothing more than one of the pack as a hitter as 1B go. I can't see a team giving up a solid starter for him unless its to dump salary.
And yet Tampa won't have any of those guys and one reason why is money.

mth123
01-08-2011, 08:11 AM
And yet Tampa won't have any of those guys and one reason why is money.

True. They have Leslie Anderson and probably Dan or Nick Johnson. I'm sure they would be interested in Alonso, but if they have their choice of getting Lee or Alonso, they'd want Lee. Heck, Guyer and Chirinois the throw ins in this deal might be options as good as Alonso.

redsfandan
01-08-2011, 08:18 AM
True. They have Leslie Anderson and probably Dan or Nick Johnson. I'm sure they would be interested in Alonso, but if they have their choice of getting Lee or Alonso, they'd want Lee. Heck, Guyer and Chirinois the throw ins in this deal might be options as good as Alonso.
Lee? You don't mean Derek Lee one of the FA 1st basemen that were available that they passed on do ya?

Maybe Guyer and Chirinois would be as good. Although I doubt there's a place that would rank either of them as highly as Alonso. They do have Dan Johnson though. Oh boy.

I'm not saying that the Reds should've done that. I'm just saying that a package headlined by Alonso (along with 2-3 other prospects) might've gotten the deal done. Besides, they have Brignac at short. A guy you've wanted to play short for the Reds. So, I think they might have more of a need for a 1st baseman than a shortstop.

PuffyPig
01-08-2011, 10:41 AM
Lets see, in 2008 Garza threw 184 innings with a 3.70 ERA, in 2009, 203 innings of 3.95 ERA and 2010 204 IP of 3.91 ERA. He did all this in the AL east facing the Yankees. Red Sox and even Jays, who have a decent offense, a whole lot of times and dealing with line-ups that don't have the free out known as the pitcher's spot.

How does that compare:

Edinson Volquez - never reached 200 IP. Had a great half a season in 2008 followed by a poor second half and a major arm injury and hasn't really established himself since.

Mike Leake - 75 IP with TOR results when no one knew anything about him and everyone was taking strike one and falling behind, followed by 60 innings of being a batting tee and an early season's end with talk of an arm injury.

Homer Bailey - never thrown 120 major league innings in a season. Never had an ERA below 4.46 and missed three months last year with shoulder problems.

Travis Wood - 102 Major league innings with promise. If he turns out like Garza I'll be pretty happy. Lets see how the league adjusts and he counters and get back to me after he's done it for 3 full years.

Johnny Cueto - never a 200 IP season and only one with an ERA below 4.00 even with the advantage of facing the pitcher and a weak division most of the time.

Bronson Arroyo - has been up and down and I like him more than many do, but he does have a shrinking K-Rate and is most likely to put an ERA in 4.20 to 4.40 range. I like Arroyo a lot and his IP, even if he winds up with a 4.40 ERA, are very valuable, but he's not as good as Garza, he's 34 in 2011 and he's expensive.

Sometimes we dig so deep we don't see what is right in front of us. If any of the Reds 6 rotation candidates have a year anything like any of Garza'a last three, I'll be very happy. I'm pretty sure a couple of them will (not as sure I can identify who exactly) and hope that 5 of them will, but if I had to make a choice I couldn't say pitcher X in the Reds rotation will have a year like that. I'm pretty confident that Garza will produce another year like that though, so yeah, at this point, I like him better.

Any analysis based entirely on ERA is flawed to start with.

His xFIP over thne last 3 years is 4.48, 4.21 and 4.51.

He's a fine pitcher, and the move to the NL Central should help, but he's been trending down the last few years ( his K-rate is dropping, and his FB rate is going way up), is starting to get expensive, and isn't a whole lot different than what we have, skill wise. He would give up a ton of HR's in GABP, as his HR's have risen from 19 to 25 to 28 over the last 3 years, based almost entirely on increased FB's.

I think the Rays decided this was a good time to move him as his value would never be higher.

TheNext44
01-08-2011, 11:19 AM
Maybe a deal for Alonso would interest them, but 1B are plentiful. Alonso is a decent prospect, but there are 5 or 6 other prospects who either play 1B or possibly will end up there who are probably better (Hosmer, Belt, Freeman, Montero, Harper, Norris). Add that to established 1B around the leagues (Pujols, Votto, Texiera, Fielder, Howard, Konerko/Dunn, Gonzalez, Helton), young major leaguers (Davis, Smoak, Barton, Morales) the interchangebale glut available for no talent each season (Lee, Laroche, Overbay, Pena, Huff, Berkman, etc.) and its hard to give up a ton of talent for a guy like Alonso who may end up nothing more than one of the pack as a hitter as 1B go. I can't see a team giving up a solid starter for him unless its to dump salary.

Alonso is ready to start in the majors right now and likely be at least a league average 1st baseman, who will be under team control for six seasons, three of which will be at around league minimum salary.

Lee, LaRoche, Overbay, Huff, Berkman, and Pena signed for around $10m a season each.

Smoak, who is about on par with Alonso prospect wise, maybe a tick better, netted the Rangers one of the best pitchers in baseball. Baseball history is littered with young first basemen getting traded for All-Star caliber players.

First basemen might be aplentiful, but they aren't cheap, and have significantly more value than you are suggesting.

Starbucks coffee can be found everywhere you look, and they still can charge $5 for a cup of coffee. Supply is not the only factor in determining price.

Scrap Irony
01-08-2011, 02:11 PM
Any analysis based entirely on ERA is flawed to start with.

His xFIP over thne last 3 years is 4.48, 4.21 and 4.51.

He's a fine pitcher, and the move to the NL Central should help, but he's been trending down the last few years ( his K-rate is dropping, and his FB rate is going way up), is starting to get expensive, and isn't a whole lot different than what we have, skill wise. He would give up a ton of HR's in GABP, as his HR's have risen from 19 to 25 to 28 over the last 3 years, based almost entirely on increased FB's.

I think the Rays decided this was a good time to move him as his value would never be higher.

Just to clarify, the following Red starter candidates 2010 xFIPs:
Leake 4.31
Wood 4.17
Bailey 3.91
Cueto 4.26
Chapman 1.76
Arroyo 4.60

mth123
01-08-2011, 06:34 PM
Lee? You don't mean Derek Lee one of the FA 1st basemen that were available that they passed on do ya?

Maybe Guyer and Chirinois would be as good. Although I doubt there's a place that would rank either of them as highly as Alonso. They do have Dan Johnson though. Oh boy.

I'm not saying that the Reds should've done that. I'm just saying that a package headlined by Alonso (along with 2-3 other prospects) might've gotten the deal done. Besides, they have Brignac at short. A guy you've wanted to play short for the Reds. So, I think they might have more of a need for a 1st baseman than a shortstop.

Nope I mean Lee the SS that they got in the deal.

I'd be all for an Alonso deal to TB for Garza or Brignac or Matt Joyce or another combination that might help the Reds. I'm just saying that Alonso hasn't shown any skills that are so unique that would make a team pay a lot for him. If they could, I'd be all for it. He's not going to help the team from AAA and he iisn't going to help that much caddying for Votto. Its just that he doesn't project to hit like the upper echelon 1B in the game and as prospects go, there are several 1B Ranked ahead of him. Its true that Justin Smoak was able to net Cliff Lee, but that was two months of Cliff Lee and the Rangers included some others in that deal. Blake Beaven is a fairly well regarded pitcher and projects to be a member of Seattle's rotation in the future.

Hopefully, if Alonso sticks around, he'll take a step forward with renewed health and become a hot commodity, but at this point I don't think he nets much as a centerpiece of a deal. He's a fine part of a package at this point, but I don't think he could be a main guy for anything significant.

mth123
01-08-2011, 07:25 PM
Any analysis based entirely on ERA is flawed to start with.

His xFIP over thne last 3 years is 4.48, 4.21 and 4.51.

He's a fine pitcher, and the move to the NL Central should help, but he's been trending down the last few years ( his K-rate is dropping, and his FB rate is going way up), is starting to get expensive, and isn't a whole lot different than what we have, skill wise. He would give up a ton of HR's in GABP, as his HR's have risen from 19 to 25 to 28 over the last 3 years, based almost entirely on increased FB's.

I think the Rays decided this was a good time to move him as his value would never be higher.

FIP is a nice theoretical calculation to provide a reality cheack for an period of performance that is out of the ordinary or inconsistent with previous seasons. But when a guy puts up nearly 600 innings of fairly consistent numbers over three years, any difference from FIP is probably related to something in the formula that doesn't fit with that particular pitcher,

If you want to believe that a bunch of health and performance questions with little track record is a better situation for a team trying to win, that's up to you. If the Reds were rebuilding I might even agree with you, but if the team is trying to win, I'll take the guy in his prime with three consecutive years of plus performance.

redsfandan
01-08-2011, 07:47 PM
Nope I mean Lee the SS that they got in the deal.

I'd be all for an Alonso deal to TB for Garza or Brignac or Matt Joyce or another combination that might help the Reds. I'm just saying that Alonso hasn't shown any skills that are so unique that would make a team pay a lot for him. If they could, I'd be all for it. He's not going to help the team from AAA and he iisn't going to help that much caddying for Votto. Its just that he doesn't project to hit like the upper echelon 1B in the game and as prospects go, there are several 1B Ranked ahead of him. Its true that Justin Smoak was able to net Cliff Lee, but that was two months of Cliff Lee and the Rangers included some others in that deal. Blake Beaven is a fairly well regarded pitcher and projects to be a member of Seattle's rotation in the future.

Hopefully, if Alonso sticks around, he'll take a step forward with renewed health and become a hot commodity, but at this point I don't think he nets much as a centerpiece of a deal. He's a fine part of a package at this point, but I don't think he could be a main guy for anything significant.
You assume that they'd prefer Lee (the shortstop). But, as far as we know, there wasn't a similar package offered to them that included Alonso. So, we'll never know. But, what you've chosen to ignore is that Alonso would fill a need. Lee wouldn't.

Yes, Cliff Lee was a rental. He's also a better pitcher. I think you're overrating the shortstop Lee and underrating Alonso. Your last line shows that. In your eyes Smoak can be a main guy of a package for, yes, something significant but apparently you don't feel that Alonso can be. Maybe you just like other prospects more than ours. Ya know, grass is greener kinda thing.

PuffyPig
01-08-2011, 07:49 PM
If the Reds were rebuilding I might even agree with you, but if the team is trying to win, I'll take the guy in his prime with three consecutive years of plus performance.


That's the problem, Gazra has been just OK, has been regressing with fewer K's, and way more FB's which has led to a dramatic increase in HR's. We know what hapens when a FB pitcher pitches in Cincy.

Looking for a TOR starter for Cincy is a jazz idea, but Gazra is not that Dog.

mth123
01-08-2011, 07:54 PM
I think you're overrating Lee and underrating Alonso. You assume that they'd prefer Lee. But, as far as we know, there wasn't a similar package offered to them that included Alonso. So, we'll never know. But, what you've chosen to ignore is that Alonso would fill a need. Lee wouldn't.

Lee can fill a spot that is much more difficult to fill. Its the same reason that I have Cozart above Alonso on my personal prospect list. Alonso has decent pedigree I suppose, but it probably means that he can be Lyle Overbay instread of Brad Eldred or Roberto Pettigine. Lyle Overbay isn't all that valuable though. If he becomes a monster that may change, but so far he hasn't become a monster. Need or no need, Lee has more value. The Rays can find an interchangeable part for 1B pretty easily. Alonso has to show he's more than that before he nets much as a main guy in a deal.

redsfandan
01-08-2011, 07:58 PM
Lee can fill a spot that is much more difficult to fill. Its the same reason that I have Cozart above Alonso on my personal prospect list. Alonso has decent pedigree I suppose, but it probably means that he can be Lyle Overbay instread of Brad Eldred or Roberto Pettigine. Lyle Overbay isn't all that valuable though. If he becomes a monster that may change, but so far he hasn't become a monster. Need or no need, Lee has more value. The Rays can find an interchangeable part for 1B pretty easily. Alonso has to show he's more than that before he nets much as a main guy in a deal.

Wow. lol Ok, I'm a little speechless. But, if that's what you think then I think I'm wasting my time.

mth123
01-08-2011, 08:06 PM
That's the problem, Gazra has been just OK, has been regressing with fewer K's, and way more FB's which has led to a dramatic increase in HR's. We know what hapens when a FB pitcher pitches in Cincy.

Looking for a TOR starter for Cincy is a jazz idea, but Gazra is not that Dog.

I never said he was a TOR starter. I said he had elite stuff and was a pitcher that a team would be comfortable with starting a play-off game. If you'd rather have unproven kids who probably have some lumps coming to them or injury question marks, that's fine, but I want to win the World Series and I'd exchange Volquez or Leake especially for Garza. Might do Bailey and Cueto too, but I'd prefer to give them more time. Wood would be difficult since he has so many years left and is a lefty but I think Garza is probably a better pitcher. I like Arroyo more than most, but I'd trade his next three years for Garza's next three.

PuffyPig
01-08-2011, 08:13 PM
Lee can fill a spot that is much more difficult to fill. Its the same reason that I have Cozart above Alonso on my personal prospect list. Alonso has decent pedigree I suppose, but it probably means that he can be Lyle Overbay instread of Brad Eldred or Roberto Pettigine. Lyle Overbay isn't all that valuable though. If he becomes a monster that may change, but so far he hasn't become a monster. Need or no need, Lee has more value. The Rays can find an interchangeable part for 1B pretty easily. Alonso has to show he's more than that before he nets much as a main guy in a deal.

Over his full 7 seasons, Overbay has an average WAR of about 2.5. Gazra is at 3 over his 3 full seasons.

Overbay has been a pretty good player for a number of years.

redsfandan
01-08-2011, 08:15 PM
Unfortunately, the specific voting results (who voted for who) for the RedsZone prospect rankings only appear to people that haven't voted. So, I can't tell if you actually voted for Cozart that highly or not. To be clear, I like Cozart as well and also think he's a little underrated. A little. But, if you have him above Alonso I think you'd be in the minority. Actually, I think you'd be in the minority about your opinions regarding Cozart, Alonso, and Garza. But, if that's what you think I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

TheNext44
01-08-2011, 08:21 PM
Lee can fill a spot that is much more difficult to fill. Its the same reason that I have Cozart above Alonso on my personal prospect list. Alonso has decent pedigree I suppose, but it probably means that he can be Lyle Overbay instread of Brad Eldred or Roberto Pettigine. Lyle Overbay isn't all that valuable though. If he becomes a monster that may change, but so far he hasn't become a monster. Need or no need, Lee has more value. The Rays can find an interchangeable part for 1B pretty easily. Alonso has to show he's more than that before he nets much as a main guy in a deal.

Lyle Overbay was traded for Dave Bush and Gabe Gross, a solid innings eater and a solid 4th outfielder.

Adam LaRoche was traded for Mike Gonzalez, a closer.

Nick Johnson was the centerpiece of a deal for Javier Vasquez.

Sean Casey was traded for Dave Burba, the Reds best pitcher and a solid #2-3 innings eater.

Carlos Pena was traded for Jeff Weaver, who was the best pitching prospect in baseball at the time.

Derrek Lee the center of a trade for Kevin Brown.

With probably around 20 minutes of research, I could triple this list.

And all of these guys made tens of millions of dollars in their career, most getting around $10M a season.

I know no one will change your mind on this, as this is an old argument. But the facts and history reallly don't back you up on this notion that a young, league average first baseman doesn't have much trade value.

mth123
01-08-2011, 08:22 PM
Unfortunately, the specific voting results (who voted for who) for the RedsZone prospect rankings only appear to people that haven't voted. So, I can't tell if you actually voted for Cozart that highly or not. To be clear, I like Cozart as well and also think he's a little underrated. A little. But, if you have him above Alonso I think you'd be in the minority. Actually, I think you'd be in the minority about your opinions regarding Cozart, Alonso, and Garza. But, if that's what you think I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

1. Chapman, 2, Mesoraco 3. Cozart 4. Alonso 5. Joseph 6. Y-Rod 7. Hamilton
8. Sappelt, 9. Grandal 10. Frazier 11. Francisco 12. Duran, 13. Boxberger, 14. Negron, 15. Lamarre, I could go on....

mth123
01-08-2011, 08:47 PM
Lyle Overbay was traded for Dave Bush and Gabe Gross, a solid innings eater and a solid 4th outfielder.

Adam LaRoche was traded for Mike Gonzalez, a closer.

Nick Johnson was the centerpiece of a deal for Javier Vasquez.

Sean Casey was traded for Dave Burba, the Reds best pitcher and a solid #2-3 innings eater.

Carlos Pena was traded for Jeff Weaver, who was the best pitching prospect in baseball at the time.

Derrek Lee the center of a trade for Kevin Brown.

With probably around 20 minutes of research, I could triple this list.

And all of these guys made tens of millions of dollars in their career, most getting around $10M a season.

I know no one will change your mind on this, as this is an old argument. But the facts and history reallly don't back you up on this notion that a young, league average first baseman doesn't have much trade value.

You're right. You won't change my mind. Burba was a back-end starter on a crummy team that was dumping his salary in a half hearted effeor to rebuild and Casey was more highly regarded than Alonso.

Bush and Gross were fluff and Overbay was a salary dump to make room for Fielder.

Derrek Lee was more highly regarded and that move came when Florida was purging its roster after winning the World Series.

Johnson for Vazquez also included Juan Rivera and Randy Choate going to the Expos in another salary dump.

Pena for Weaver is your best example but Detroit also got Jeremy Bonderman and Franklyn German (considered a future closer) in that deal. Maybe if the Reds added Leake and Joseph to Alonso they could have gotten Garza. I like Garza more than most here do, but I probably wouldn't make that deal.

TheNext44
01-08-2011, 09:18 PM
You're right. You won't change my mind. Burba was a back-end starter on a crummy team that was dumping his salary in a half hearted effeor to rebuild and Casey was more highly regarded than Alonso.

Bush and Gross were fluff and Overbay was a salary dump to make room for Fielder.

Derrek Lee was more highly regarded and that move came when Florida was purging its roster after winning the World Series.

Johnson for Vazquez also included Juan Rivera and Randy Choate going to the Expos in another salary dump.

Pena for Weaver is your best example but Detroit also got Jeremy Bonderman and Franklyn German (considered a future closer) in that deal. Maybe if the Reds added Leake and Joseph to Alonso they could have gotten Garza. I like Garza more than most here do, but I probably wouldn't make that deal.

Dave Bush and Gabe Gross combined in their first three years as Brewers to provide 11.8 WAR. Hardly fluff. Matt Garza in his last three seasons has provided 8.5 WAR.

Casey was valued higher than Alonso, but not by much. Casey's highest ranking as a prospect was #20, Alonso #35. Burba was actually a better pitcher than Garza has been so far.

The Pena trade was very complicated, but it really came down to, from an A's perspective (who traded Pena) to be Pena and German for Ted Lilly.

Derrek Lee was not more highly regarded than Alonso, as the both were ranked right around the #30-50 spots as prospects by Baseball America. Their minor league stats also are very similar.

Johnson was the center piece of the deal at the time. Choate and Rivera were toss in players at the time.

And it really doesn't matter if the deal was a salary dump or not, as that is probably how the Reds will trade Alonso, for a veteran player who is being
moved because he makes too much money and Alonso will provide 5 years of cheap production.

jmcclain19
01-09-2011, 05:27 PM
It makes me laugh to know that the Chicago Papers, couldn't even get the right photo of Garza to run on the front pages today - they ran one of Joaquín Benoit instead and called him Garza

http://deadspin.com/5728447/chicago-sun+times-mixes-up-its-latino-baseball-players

http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/11/2011/01/340x_benoitgarza.jpg
http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/11/2011/01/340x_benoit.jpg
Real Matt Garza
http://sports.popcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/MattGarza.jpg