Episode 5 of the BN Podcast: Matt Garza’s Future, Free Agent Targets, and Roster Mania

It’s the fifth episode of a super awesome podcast featuring me and Sahadev Sharma. You can listen to the podcast there below, or download it for later listening. And now, FINALLY, you can subscribe via iTunes. Here’s your iTunes link, and you can also find it by searching in the iTunes store. Hooray!

As always, you can send questions, comments, etc. to the official podcast email address (podcast AT bleachernation DOT com) if you want your thoughts included on a future show.

On this week’s episode, the BN community comes in for some compliments from Sahadev, so that’s cool. We also figure out how to pronounce Barret Loux, get side-tracked by Mitch Albom ridiculousness, dump on everyone’s dreams about being in a big league front office, and rant about link-baiting media practices. I also jump into the way back machine and talk about how last week’s Matt Garza drama reminded me of the last time I pissed off a Cubs player.

Oh, we also talk about Cubs stuff, including last evening’s flurry of roster moves, the Shawn Camp re-signing, the Cubs’ broadcast booth, a couple more free agent targets, and Matt Garza’s future with the Cubs.

If that sounds like a lot of stuff, it is. Today’s show is about 20 minutes longer than usual – you’re welcome, or we’re sorry, depending on your preferences. Enjoy:

Brett Taylor is the editor and lead writer at Bleacher Nation, and can also be found as Bleacher Nation on Twitter and on Facebook.

41 responses to “Episode 5 of the BN Podcast: Matt Garza’s Future, Free Agent Targets, and Roster Mania”

  1. kranzman54

    Wow, a podcast the day before Thanksgiving, you must have the most laid back wife ever man.

  2. terencem

    Happy to see this on iTunes. I’m too lazy to plug my phone into my computer.

  3. Mac

    Could you see the Cubs taking a flyer on Figgins for a 1 yr deal to fill the void at 3B? Saw he was DFA’d

    1. DocPeterWimsey

      Filling a void with a void sounds sort of Zen. Seriously, Figgins is almost certainly done. How he fell apart so quickly, I do not know, but that’s a separate issue.

      Amusingly, I was really bummed when the Cubs did not pursue him in 2009. Given the general patterns of how player-types age, Figgins was the sort that you would have expected to age gracefully. Well, that’s why we have error bars!

      1. DarthHater

        Filling a void with a void sounds sort of Zen.

        What is the sound of one hand striking out, Grasshopper?

        1. DocPeterWimsey

          *SMACK!!!*. You know, like you heard every Friday night at the bar when you were in college! :-)

  4. The Show

    Scott Cousins?

    1. Mac

      Yeah, I was just throwing it out there since the 3B market is very weak. Probably rather have Stewart than Figgins. Just seeing what others peoples thoughts were on it

      1. MichiganGoat

        I’d rather have Ron Cey come out of retirement than have Figgins on the roster

  5. Spencer

    I really hate the “I’ll defer to the organization” argument about decisions. It may be true, but using that argument is sort of a cop out, I think. It’s like nothing can be criticized, ever, because the people in charge must know best. This isn’t directed at you specifically, Brett, but just in general. I think it gets used in the media a lot too.

    1. hansman1982

      The problem is we are trying to get in the mindset of the organization with (at best) only half of the information so when it is something that isn’t mind-shockingly one way or the other then I think it would be right to defer to them.

      1. Lou

        And yet there are individuals who think the know the full reach of the mindset of the FO on this site.

        1. Dr. Percival Cox

          This cuts both ways.

          1. Lou

            Agreed but the statement still stands.

            1. Dr. Percival Cox

              I’ll grant that.

        2. Spencer

          So no one can ever question anything because they don’t know the whole story? I guess that’s the be all end all of the internet and debate shows and sites like this. Why even have conversations when the fall back is “well, Theo knows best.” That’s like a parent telling their kid they can’t do something “because I said so.” Its a stock response. And its a flimsy one.

          1. MichiganGoat

            You seem grumpy my friend.

            1. DarthHater

              And goats know grumpiness.

            2. Spencer

              meh, don’t mean to come off that way, sorry. I just think the “don’t question sports execs because they know best” thing is a little lame. It’s like..everyone was making a big deal the Lakers didn’t hire Phil Jackson. I think debating about sports is part of what makes it great, and when people use the executives are omniscient argument it seems a little lazy.

              Again: This isn’t directly at anyone or anything in particular. I guess it’s just a pet peeve.

              1. MichiganGoat

                Debating for the sake of debating is awfully ESPNy or Jim Romey if When Brett doesn’t see a reason to critique and wants to avoid creating a debate just to have something to complain and talk about is the exact reason why this site is great. Great reporting doesn’t require scandalous, debatable, or argumentative material this is whee BN is successful- it’s not ESPN First Take.

                1. Spencer

                  I mean…I obviously agree that the site is great; I’ve read it every day for nearly two years.

  6. Spencer

    Does the fact that you know that some people in the front office read the site temper what you write?

    1. MichiganGoat

      What are you getting at here Spencer?

      1. Spencer

        I’m not really “getting at” anything. Brett has said in the past he prefers blogging to conventional journalism because it gives him more freedom to write whatever he wants, as opposed to beat writers or TV guys who may catch flack from the organization if they are too critical of players or roster decisions. But, there’s probably a flip side to that – BN may afford more freedom to write, but I’m just curious if that freedom is restrained at all since front office people or players (see: Matt Garza saga) may read the site. BN is a growing operation, obviously, and while it’s still a blog and not traditional media, being overly critical about people or decisions may not sit well with the few higher ups that may read the site – that is, if Brett cares about offending them (which I suspect he does).

        So, long story short: How much does the fact that people within the Cubs (players or other personnel) may read the site impact (if at all) what is written?

        N.B. This may not be the appropriate forum to ask his question or to solicit a response, and if I overstepped, my apologies.

        1. DarthHater

          I think it’s pretty clear that Brett is angling for a job in the Cubs’ broadcast booth. [emoticon deliberately omitted]

  7. Frank

    I think Brett is one of the most objective writers that I have read and I really enjoy the posts,tweets and pod casts. There seem to be three camps among the fans. I think the largest right now is: theo is always right,how dare you question him! The second is theo is always wrong,lets spend like the Yankees do. The third which I belong to is: let’s wait and see. I like the overall plan. Some moves I like,some I question and a couple I just plain don’t like.

    1. hansman1982

      no different than politics – you have 1 camp that is way over there, another that is clear on the other side and 80% of everyone somewhere in the middle. Unfortunately, 80% of the comments on here are from the 20% that are polarized.

      1. Kyle

        The 20% are the ones who are usually right. I hate the smug polarization of the middle, which are usually just too lazy to take the time to understand the issues and pick a side :)

        1. hansman1982

          again we disagree – the more I learn about the world the more I land in the middle…but that is a different discussion for a different website.

          The more I look at the Cubs situation, the more I land at the middle 80% that just says “I like the cardinal direction the ship is headed in. Will we occasionally hit a wave the wrong way, sure, but keep her on this heading Captain.”

  8. cub4life


    Just got te chance to listen to the 5th podcast and I agree with Sahadev on his rant….I can’t stand it (this is MY opinion and that’s it) when everyone keeps on throwing out there the largest contract ever for 300 mil or an outragious contract for that player for 100 mil…..give me the realness of it on’t give me the total it’s meaning less. What means something now and future is how many years and how much per year…..That is one major reason I don’t like to listen to the major announcementsthat are put ot there, to much imfosis on the wrong numbers. Well enough of my rant, love the podcast and now for part 6.