Yesterday, you could see smoke coming from the Chicago Cubs’ Wrigley Field offices from miles away – and, no, I’m not talking about that electrical fire (I told myself I wouldn’t make a lame fire joke … crud). I’m talking about the Cubs’ trade talks with multiple teams about their staff ace, Matt Garza. That smoke picked up as the day went along, and reached a thick, billowy black by last night. Here’s the latest:

  • In case you missed the update yesterday afternoon, the thrust was this: a source told me that the Cubs were in serious discussions with multiple teams about Matt Garza, and the source’s best guess was that there was a 90 percent chance Garza wouldn’t be with the team come Spring Training.
  • From there, Dave Kaplan said: “Hearing that talks on Matt Garza are heating up. Lots of interest because he is under control contractually for two more seasons. Price though is incredibly high so not sure if a deal gets done. Toronto, Yankees, Boston are all involved.”
  • Jim Bowden chimed in to say plainly that the Cubs and Blue Jays continue to discuss a Matt Garza deal.
  • Jon Heyman said that the Cubs are focused on receiving young pitching back in a deal for Garza, and noted that the Blue Jays and Yankees would have what it takes to put a package together.
  • Heyman added this morning that the Red Sox remain a possibility for Garza after landing Andrew Bailey to fill their void at closer yesterday. Ken Rosenthal also noted Garza as a possibility for the Red Sox yesterday after the Bailey deal. For what it’s worth, none of the players in the Bailey deal were names I was hearing attached to the Cubs’ talks with the Red Sox about Garza. That is to say only that the Bailey trade did not necessarily remove any critical pieces from the Red Sox’s system.
  • For my part, I was up late last night pulling info. Two sources independently told me that, as of late last night, the Cubs were pushing teams to start putting together their best offer for Garza. Both sources indicated the teams most heavily involved as of that time were the Blue Jays, Tigers and Yankees (those are not necessarily the only teams still involved – teams seem to come in and out of the picture – but they are the teams most heavily involved at last check).
  • Does that mean a trade will happen today or even at all? Nah. Of course not. It means, at most, that the Cubs are coming to a crossroads where they’d like to move the offseason ball forward. Either Garza will or will not open the season with the Cubs, and the organization would probably like to know which direction they’ll be going sooner rather than later. In other words, asking teams to make their best offer is not necessarily a precursor to selecting the best offer.
  • But, like, yeah: a lot of smoke.
  • jeff

    I don’t understand why so many people are against the cubs trading Garza. I don’t know the numbers as far as run support that he got(or didn’t get) but his numbers aren’t THAT great, with the exception of k/9. Garza’s era is average and he hasn’t posted a spectacular win/loss season since getting to the majors. Maybe I haven’t been keeping up like I should but in my opinion if we can let him go for 2 maybe 3 young prospects then I’m all for it. The Cubs have been notorius in years past for getting rid of younger guys right after a good season for older, washed up veterans that have nothing left and the same with signing veteran players that cost way too much and have nothing left to offer. At this point the cubs have nothing to lose by trading away Garza for some young talent. Just my opinion

    • Jeff

      Get a new name, I was here first….lol.

      Just kidding.

      • jeff

        Haha yeah I noticed right after I posted sorry about that

        • Jeff

          Just remember, I’m big J. I’m only on board with trading Garza to Detroit. I think they have the best talent, not so thrilled with the Blue Jays guys. But, we will see.

          • cubsfaninbama

            I don’t know. I like drabek from the jays, I think the kid has some potential….maybe it’s just the name Drabek that sounds promising….haha

  • Lou Cub

    I’m completely with you Jeff, the Cubs aren’t ready to contend and if they were there is no way you deal Garza..But since were looking at 2 -3 years down the road and the upper levels of the minor league cupboard are bare, we need to replenish and after the guys we got for Marshall, i’m expecting anothe rsolid return for Matt..I’m of the mind set that those who want the Cubs to give in and sign the big time free agents and patch it up aren’t really the true Cubs fan..This team has not been properly assembled in years and is over due for a reconstructuion!!!

  • Ryan

    I think it comes down 4 things. 1. what the Cubs gave up to get him. 2 the fact that they would be trading him for unproven players 3. the fact that the Cubs are likley to be bad this year and they want to be able to atleast have someone that is good to root for 4. He’s a young TOR starter that the Cubs need and can afford to pay in 2 years when his contract comes up

    • cubsfaninbama

      True but in my opinion Garza hasn’t really proven himself either…….although like I said that could possibly be due to the lack of run support…..I guess last year could have been different had he had the support, maybe I’m not giving him enough credit. He has only been with the club for a season

      • Jeff

        He left 7 games with a lead only to watch the bullpen implode. He was better than what his numbers showed, but if we are going to build from the ground up, he is the only guy on the roster that will bring back premium talent.

        • cubsfaninbama

          Yeah our bullpen was horrendous…..doesn’t surprise me….I remember seeing that quite a bit and wondering what happened to managers just letting the guys pitch?? Especially when the bullpen was as bad as the cubs was….didn’t make any sense to me to pull those starters after 6…..6 1/3 with a 2 or 3 run lead and half the time they wouldn’t even be in trouble. It just didn’t make sense…….the cubs managers have been bad about this for the past few years……I would watch all these CGs from other teams pitchers and it seemed like a CG from a cub was few and far between

    • KCubsfan

      Ok numbers 1 and 4 don’t matter. It doesn’t matter what the Cubs gave up to get him and there is why. That was the old regme and they should not be held accountable for Hendry’s mistakes. If they get player that can fill holes on the team then it a win for the Cubs. 4 doesn’t matter they can pay for him yes but what if the prospects pay off. Also what if Garza gets hurt, then his value Goes down and he doesn’t pitch any way. What if he needs TJ then Cubs lose him for a yr. So there are risk not matter what they do.

  • cubsfaninbama

    Better jeff?

  • Lou Cub

    Ryan, I can almost guarantee you that the Cubs will get a better return thatn what they gave up…First off Tampa took less from the Cubs to get Garza out of the AL..It’s been posted by many that Texas had a superior offer but Friedman wanted him out of the league. Plus the Yankees and Red Sox were never considered suitors for his services because they were in the AL East like Tampa. hey are in play here and could drive up the price..Plus aside from Lee and Archer they were expendable..Fuld..Please.. Guyer was a 25 year old set to play @AA and Chirinos was blocked by Castillo, Clevenger and Soto…. Don’t forget we got a young pitcher who did quite well in the minors last year in Zach Rosscup as well.Sure the Cubs could pay Matt Garza but when this team starts to rise, he’ll be entering his late to post prime..It’s time to parlay 1 guy into a solid 4!!!

  • Lou

    Here’s an alternative perspective of the Matt Garza trade rumors from the Jays’ side of things: