Quantcast

matt garza cubsIt should come as no surprise, given the tenor of rumors over the past week (including many that placed near-certain odds on the Cubs dealing Matt Garza before his next start no Monday), that the Cubs are reportedly close to finalizing a deal involving the best pitcher on the market.

One of those earlier reports came from Buster Olney, who placed it at 80/20 that the Cubs would deal Garza not only before his next start, but by Friday. As in tomorrow.

And now Olney hears the Cubs might be making good on that timeline, asking teams for “best and final” offers. That comes from other team sources, who also believe Garza will be dealt before his scheduled start on Monday.

It’s a predictable, but laudable, approach by the Cubs’ front office in their efforts to maximize the return on Garza. While it might not be feasible to replicate in the prospect world, I wonder if the Cubs could even implement a proxy of the blind bidding system we’ve seen employed occasionally on the international free agent stage and frequently in the Japanese posting system – i.e., instead of taking the offers around and saying, “can you beat this? can you beat this?,” the Cubs simply say, “this is it: we’re accept the best offer we get today – make it a damn good one.” The theory behind the system is that it forces eager teams to bid against themselves, rather than merely having to top the erstwhile highest offer. If teams know that their “best and final” offer is going to be then taken around to other teams, they might still hold back on the offer, and the whole “best and final” thing is neutered.

Given the timing of the request for best and final offers, I have to believe the Cubs were indeed waiting for the Competitive Balance Lottery to pass to see if any of the interested teams would be able to supplement their offers with an extra draft pick. That doesn’t mean the Cubs will land a pick as a piece of the eventual deal, obviously, but the Cubs might as well see what’s out there in that regard.

Don’t assume that we’re going to hear a resolution on this ASAP, though. The call for best and final could be over the next few days, or it could have already been done, and the Cubs will want some time to mull it over. And it’s not like they have to accept one of the offers right now.

Apropos of … something? … nothing? … Olney followed up his “best and final” tweet with a couple points exclusively about the Rangers. Specifically, Olney noted that the Rangers are involved in these talks, and, if the Cubs are looking for pitching prospects, the Rangers can accommodate even without top young pitcher Martin Perez. Olney names C.J. Edwards and Luke Jackson as possibilities. Each is a quality arm still in the lower levels of the minors, and each is a fringe top 100 prospect (if you looked at the right list).

UPDATE: Ken Rosenthal suggests Olney’s tweets were apropos of something, saying “Sources: #Rangers “most motivated” on Garza, have had extensive talks with #Cubs.” He adds that a full story is coming. Dun dun dun …

UPDATE 2 (3:25pm CT): I should clarify something that a few of you discerning types have pointed out in the comments: it’s entirely possible (plausible, even?) that the Cubs already have an acceptable offer in hand from at least one team, and they’ve asked for best and final from everyone else, because they’re otherwise ready to pull the trigger. That gets away a bit from the blind bidding system (and its advantages), but seems more likely how these things play out.

UPDATE 3 (3:30pm CT): Jeff Passan says he hears that if Garza doesn’t go to the Rangers, the most likely other destinations are the Cardinals, the Red Sox, the Diamondbacks, and the Dodgers.

UPDATE 4 (3:37pm CT): Rosenthal’s piece (together with Jon Morosi) is up. It’s basically a more robust version of his tweet: the Cubs and Rangers have had extensive discussions, but other teams remain involved. The Rangers are the most “motivated” to get a deal done, but Rosenthal mentions the Dodgers, specifically, as another team involved. The Red Sox, Diamondbacks, Indians, and Cardinals have been involved, according to Rosenthal’s sources, but they haven’t wanted to meet the asking price for a rental.

UPDATE 5 (6:35pm CT): Gordon Edes reports that Clay Buchholz suffered a setback in his recovering from ongoing shoulder issues (bursitis) today. He was supposed to throw a bullpen session today, but it was scratched, and he’s due for reevaluation tomorrow. There has been some thinking that the Red Sox’s interest in picking up a pitcher was tempered by their confidence that Buchholz could return soon. If that’s no longer the case, will they become more eager to make a deal for, say, Garza? There is some logic there, but it all depends on Buchholz’s prognosis and the Red Sox’s willingness to roll the dice. They’re a good trading partner for the Cubs for a number of reasons (deep farm system, great upper-level arms, familiarity with the system).

UPDATE 6 (8:00pm CT): Rosenthal says one official in the Cubs/Rangers talks believes a deal is “getting closer,” and that prospects from various levels are involved (including “possibly” Mike Olt). In some ways, this doesn’t quite square with a “best and final” type scheme. Do the Rangers have the best offer, but it’s still not quite enough? Are the Cubs actively working with the Rangers to see if they’ll top the other “best” offer out there? I don’t pretend to have the answers here. We know only that the Cubs are extensively discussing a Garza deal, and the Rangers are clearly one of the primary suitors.

UPDATE 7 (8:28pm CT): Dave Kaplan spoke to a scouting friend who says the offers the Cubs are getting are “very solid,” and that a deal will likely be done this weekend. So, still kind of the same general message.

UPDATE 8 (8:37pm CT): Kaplan adds that the scout – presumably the same one – says the Cubs hold all of the cards, and Garza is the only high-level starter available out there. Kaplan also confirmed that final offers are rolling in from a handful of teams.

UPDATE 9 (9:05pm CT): The Rosenthal/Morosi piece has been updated slightly to include mention of Rangers pitching prospect C.J. Edwards as possibly part of the deal. These guys tend not to pull random A-ball pitchers out of their hat. In other words, if they’re naming Edwards as possibly being part of a deal, then he’s at least been discussed.

UPDATE 10 (9:18pm CT): Kaplan’s scout source is really pushing the Cubs’ strength, saying that the Rangers cannot afford to not acquire Garza. That seems to be overstating things a bit, but obviously they do have a clear need.

UPDATE 11 (9:54pm CT): Sahadev suggests on Twitter that the names we’re hearing from Texas – i.e. Olt, Edwards and Jackson are indeed in play, but the Cubs are hoping for more. Don’t assume that the Cubs *definitely* have an offer on the table for those three. It’s only safe to assume that those are names in play.

  • Boba Fett

    Ok maybe not your neck just your fingers so you can’t type stupid breaking news crap all the time. You are one annoying a@@ dude

    • DocPeterWimsey

      Don’t do the bad force vibes: that got your dad in trouble!

  • Timmy

    ok this i accept. thanks for reducing your curse.

  • http://bleachernation.com someday…2015?

    Baez with the golden sombrero tonight… At least he walked once to balance it out. :)

  • Boba Fett

    Lol. Just having fun

  • jpeck

    Still my prediction: Cubs will get Olt and 2 young pitchers. Come on ( Edwards and Luke.J.)
    I just dont see any other outcome.

    • Serious Cubs Fan

      If we get Olt I hope we swap him to another team for more young pitching

    • nkniacc13

      I think your right in the sense its likely to be 2 pitchers and a position player and if its Texas its likely Olt

      • EvenBetterNewsV2.0

        Come on Sardinas and not Olt!!! If there is one position type you want to take from the Rangers it is International SS. Its like the fat kid with a cupcake. Always manages to find more.

  • Timmy

    BREAKING NEWS: in 5 years the cubs will have breaking news…maybe

    • Serious Cubs Fan

      Damn I can figure out which one was more annoying. You or Goldfinch from back in the day.

      • Timmy

        i am not annoying, i am insightful

        • EvenBetterNewsV2.0

          No you are not.

        • waittilthisyear

          seriously man, this is a good community that offers a lot of different, legitimate opinions on all things cubs. those of us who have been coming to this site enjoy it not only because of brett’s terrific writing and coverage, but because the commenters are a class above the other blogs. if you think you are being funny, trust me, you are not. if you think you are being insightful, then go ahead i guess, as all (actual) opinions are welcome. if you are just fucking around, cut it out man

          • Timmy

            thank you, finally someone who understands me

          • Danny Ballgame

            If you don’t like people who think they are funny and are constantly fucking around, the internet is not the place for you

            • Timmy

              on a scale of 1-10 for funny i would say that i am a 7. some of you are 8′s, but not on purpose

            • waittilthisyear

              that was kind of my point danny boy, that this place is not like the rest of the internet (or wasn’t at one point)

          • hansman1982

            Please, people, just stop talking to him.

  • North Side Irish

    John Arguello (@CubsDen) tweeted at 9:51 PM on Thu, Jul 18, 2013:
    Hearing right now that it looks like two pitchers and a position player with Olt a possibility, but Cubs may prefer Sardinas.

    • nkniacc13

      I would prefer Sardinas unless Cubs have a flip ready for Olt. I wonder if Garza only in Texas deal but if he would go somewhere else then others involved?

      • brunsmk

        Good glove middle infielder that can hit is probably worth more then olt at this point.

    • Carew

      What if it actually is the Indians and the Cubs get Salazar/Bauer/Chisenhall?

      I realize with all this info, it’s probably the rangers, but it’s still interesting to contemplate.

  • North Side Irish

    Kiley McDaniel (@kileymcd) tweeted at 9:59 PM on Thu, Jul 18, 2013:
    Scout raved about him this weekend. 91-96, above avg offspd/ath MT @Ken_Rosenthal Sources: Rangers RHP C.J. Edwards in play in Garza talks.

  • Boba Fett

    Breaking news Timmy is at it again

  • Afinch

    Anyone know anything about Connor Sadzeck? Local kid (Crystal Lake) at A level with Texas (Hickory). Has ok numbers. Thoughts?

    • Mike S.

      Grew up with Connor (from CL myself) he is tall and has a strong arm. Very young, great attitude, would love to see him as a throw in.

  • Kramden

    Soooo…. Since everyone and their mothers feel Olt is coming to the Cub organization, where would that place him number-wise in the Top 20 prospect list and who would he knock out of the Top 20???

    • Mason Asher

      He may not even crack top 10. Atleast I don’t think he should.

      • Billy

        Olt is in the top 20 in the entire MLB, how would he not make the Cub’s top 10?

        • Billy
          • CubsFaninMS

            My guess is that he would be above or below Alcantara.

            • Cubbie Blues

              Way to hedge your bets. :lol:

              • CubsFaninMS

                Ha. I believe Keith Law would put him in that range. I’d put Olt at the back of our Top 10. Zastryzny? Candelario? Underwood? I like them but I believe Olt has at least as much upside as them. It’s hard to gauge. Most of us in here have a great deal of knowledge on our prospects. I’m relatively well-versed but I don’t profess to be a scout.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

      I think I answered this a few days back, and without looking back to see what I said then, I think I said somewhere in the 16-18 range. I could probably be talked up a little from that, but I doubt any higher than 12.

      Excellent glove, very good power, very good OBP, but if he can’t make consistent contact at the major league level none of that matters any more than it did for Ian Stewart. And given his elevated K% throughout his career, that ability to make contact in the majors concerns me. Even with the upside I see him as a pretty big risk.

      • turn two

        Correct me if I’m wrong but i believe olt would come straight to the big club thus taking him off a prospect list

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          I hope you’re wrong. He has yet to have any sustained success in Triple A. I don’t think he’s ready.

          • Mason Asher

            Luke, would you rather take a chance on Olt? Or Bauer? I would go 100% Bauer.

            • Patrick G

              Not Luke but 110% Bauer

              • DocPeterWimsey

                Yeah, I’d prefer Bauer, too. Talented young pitchers are always a risk, but I suspect that an Epstein-Hoyer run team won’t work as hard to make Bauer conform to “it is known” routines and let Bauer do what Bauer needs to do to prosper. (After all, the Sox clubhouse was basically like Animal House, except with more booze and more hookers: and more flakes than a cereal box!)

              • CubsFaninMS

                Agreed. A high ceiling/low floor pitcher is much more of a need in our system than a high ceiling/floor third baseman.

        • Serious Cubs Fan

          I think we’d have to Olt in the minors. He’s having a pretty bad year in the minors so far, but coming out of massive slump kinda

      • jpeck

        But dont you think by getting lets say ( Edwards and Luke ) Olt would be well worth the risk?

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          No.

          Edwards I like the upside on quite a bit.
          L. Jackson is a quality pitching prospect, but I think the Cubs could land someone about like him in a deal with a lot of teams. Odds are good, I think, someone very like him will come back in the deal no matter who they deal with.

          Olt… if you buy in you love that package. I don’t. I can’t get past that K%. Swap him out with Alfaro or Sardinas and we have a much better deal in my book.

          • jpeck

            Do you see Sardinas as a SS or 2b in majors? Do you like him better than Alcantara as a prospect? I’m not too familiar with Alfaro….

      • Serious Cubs Fan

        Luke,

        Do you think we could swap Olt with another team like Seattle for more upside starting pitching prospects?

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          Maybe. It depends on how he looks the rest of the season.

      • Kramden

        Uno momento, Luke….

        The Rangers are thought to have a very good and deep farm system with the Cubs still playing catch-up on that score. Olt has always been in just about everyone’s Top 5 when ranking Ranger prospects, yet you’re indicating he would meerly rank 16-18 in the Cub system.

        Somehow I’m seeing a disconnect there?

        • hansman1982

          Luke is seeing the same as some of us in that he appears to be Brett Jackson 2.0. If he believes that to be the case, the ranking makes sense.

          • Kyle

            Olt is a great guy for dividing the people who just look at old prospect rankings versus those who do their own analysis.

            • Andrew

              ok then what about the guys at baseball america that ranked him 44 overall? Yes I have to rely on rankings simply because I don’t have access to seeing these guys play.

          • Kramden

            A year ago the Rangers said “no” to parting with Olt in a Garza deal BEFORE Garza went down with injury AND had a whole year of control before free agency.

            Now Olt is suddenly chopped liver because he’s having a tough year and needs a good optometrist?

            • Kyle

              It’s amazing how people will cling to some silly excuse for a flailing, failing prospect.

              He’s had his eyes fixed. He still can’t hit advanced pitching. Just like Brett Jackson’s new swing didn’t fix anything.

            • Jed Jam Band

              No, we’re just suggesting that there are issues there that make us all nervous. Sahadev said the Cubs prefer Sardinas and there is a reason for that.

        • EvenBetterNewsV2.0

          Kramden, that was before the season. Look at what he has done this year and you will understand why he has fallen off the face of the earth. People thought his struggles last year wouldn’t happen again this year. They were wrong. As you will notice he has dropped out of every mid-season ranking list he may have been on to start the season.

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          I think the Cubs already beat the Rangers farm system. I agree that many analysts rank Olt sky high, but I disagree with those analysts. That’s actually not too uncommon.

          For example, Jonathan Mayo still ranks Brett Jackson as the Cubs No 4 prospect.
          http://chicago.cubs.mlb.com/mlb/prospects/watch/y2013/index.jsp?c_id=chc#list=chc

          I put Jackson much, much lower than that. Doesn’t mean Mayo is wrong or that I’m wrong, but mainly that we are looking at different things, and looking at things differently.

          • Crockett

            Luke. I am agreeing with you too much lately. Stop it.

          • Jed Jam Band

            You’re being too rational, Luke. Don’t you know we’re supposed to get crazy and make all sorts of silly, fanatical claims?

          • http://bleachernation.com someday…2015?

            I don’t think Mayo really updates his list. He still has Alcantara as a present 20 power with a future of a 30.

            • Jed Jam Band

              He seems to take out guys who no longer are rookie players, but that’s about it.

          • Serious Cubs Fan

            Yep. Jonathan Mayo really needs to update mlb.com’s top 100 prospect list. It’s still preseason top 100 and not an updated top midseason re-ranking. I doubt he’ll update it. He never updated his 2012 list once

            • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

              He’d be at least top 6 or 7 for Baseball America most likely. I can see them slotting Alcantara and maybe Johnson over him, depending on who is doing the final list.

              • Serious Cubs Fan

                Mayo doesn’t seem to take K% or BB% in consideration into his prospect rankings, as others. He loves those toolsy players, so I could imagine him ranking Alcantara fairly high

              • Serious Cubs Fan

                Luke,

                Mayo just tweeted, saying he’d updating mlb.com’s prospect rankings in the next couple weeks. Probably after the trade deadline

      • Andrew

        obviously Baseball america is not the end-all be-all but the fact that he’s ranked no. 44 overall there makes me believe that he is at least top ten in the cubs system

    • http://deepcenterfield.blogspot.com Jason Powers

      This is Luke’s list.http://www.bleachernation.com/2013/07/14/this-week-in-the-minors-midseason-top-40-chicago-cubs-prospects/

      Scouting book: http://www.scoutingbook.com/prospects/CHC

      Put him at 9/10 in my opinion, because Olt’s:
      1) 25
      2) Struggled recently

      Knock out:
      Jeimer Candelario for positional reasons only. Can;t have 4-5 3B prospects all in the top 20. (Bryant, Lake, Olt, Vitters)

      • Mason Asher

        Woah! Soler is ranked higher than Bryant? How is that?

        • EvenBetterNewsV2.0

          Because they are all really close and it comes down to what you like in a prospect more?

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          Um… Bryant is #2 in my current list. Soler is #4. Bryant is the higher of the two.

          • http://deepcenterfield.blogspot.com Jason Powers

            I thought your list was pretty darn on. I just posted the SB, for a comparison that alleges to change daily.

          • Mason Asher

            My bad. I looked at scouting book ha.

  • HackAttack

    Crockett, Lou B., Assman,

    Thanks for keeping this entertaining.

  • Afinch

    FWIW, C.J. Edwards twitter handle is @CEdwardsSBS.

  • sossa

    From the pitching aspect of things we would get a better return from the indians. I don’t like the idea of getting a questionable 3rd basemen and 2 low a pitchers for garza that doesn’t sit well with me. I think they should be tossing other guys in the mix so they can get olt AND a proven arm at either High A ball or the majors.

  • turn two

    If update 11 is to be believed, we are angling to add enough to get Profar and Texas probably isn’t budging.

    • Serious Cubs Fan

      I don’t think we have enough pieces to get profar. Profar is comletely out of the question. We could give them Garza, Soriano (eat his whole contract), Russell, and Barney and that still wouldn’t be enough to get Profar

      • hansman1982

        Well, ya, you are giving up 1 good, 1 decent and a couple garbage pieces to get a big-time SS.

        If we want Profar, I’d say Garza, Baez and Barney gets it done.

        • hansman1982

          and I’d do that in a heartbeat

          • Blublud

            You are smoking crack if you make that deal.

            • bbmoney

              I don’t think tex does it. Barney isn’t needed for them. Baez is still a big risk (and I like Baez). Garza a rental.

              Profar is 20 and in the show and can help this year.

              • Blublud

                PROFAR IS OVERRATED. I HAVE BEEN YELLING IT FOR A YEAR.

                He is not even equal to Castro. Castro age 20 season blows Profar out the water.

                • bbmoney

                  Since that’s a perfect indicator of future value….. Thanks for the caps though. Really makes me understand that you mean it.

              • turn two

                can’t think of Garza as rental in this situation, you have to value that you are trading his potential return value plus Baez and Barney and to trade all that for one prospect is ridiculous

                • Blublud

                  Right. If Theo called Texas and offered Garza, Barney and Baez, they would except before they even took their next breath.

                  • turn two

                    And the cubs brass would have thrown away four high level prospects and Barney if he gets hurt, its almost laughable how bad that deal would be for the cubs

                    • Isaac

                      Agreed, if you took Profar’s name off his stat line, people would be very very worried that he would never hit in the majors. He was an average hitting in the minors, and is scuffling in the majors. he is a mildly better hitter than Barney, but I’d be surprised if he is even similar with the glove. The thing I like least about Profar is actually his upside. Limited power, not a big base-stealing threat, not a big avg. or slugging guy. Basically he is a plus-glove and an OBP threat. Nice player, not a stud.

          • Crockett

            You are so down on Baez, it’s amazing.

            • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

              It’s not a case of being down on Baez, it’s a case of mitigating risk. Profar is ahead of Baez developmentally making him a lower risk proposition. Ceilings are similar (more power for Baez, better hit for Profar), so it’d be a case of taking a similar player at a lower risk level.

              Which is why Texas wouldn’t do it. They wouldn’t deal Profar for a guy they hope will do what Profar is doing a year or two from now. That’s a Marlins-style cost savings move that Texas is too smart to make.

              • Isaac

                Better hit for Profar? In what universe? You’re talking about a guy with a .276 career minor league avg, and that is with an extended stint in the PCL! I get that he’s young, but my word is he the most overrated prospect ever. Give me Baez’ 30 hr upside up the middle any day of the week. Giving up the best-arm-on-the market, a soon to be 2-time gold glove winning second basemen, and a top 15 prospect for a .276 career minor league hitter currently floundering in the big leagues, that’s called team suicide.

                • Blublud

                  Couldn’t have said it better.

                  • Timmy

                    i think we should trade for mumford and sons

                • hansman1982

                  Baez has yet to prove he can make consistent enough contact over a sustained stretch to be able to do anything with that power.

                  His terrible batting eye is going to get him eaten alive in the majors.

                • hansman1982

                  You realize, Baez has a career .280 BA, right? All the while being older than Profar.

            • hansman1982

              Part of what Luke said. I think if “it clicking” is a thing and it clicks for Baez, that would be viewed as the worst trade ever. I just have no faith in a guy who doesn’t appear able to take a walk or make consistent contact in A ball.

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

            Same. Maybe six or seven heartbeats because of Baez in the deal, but I’d do it.

            • Blublud

              Yeah right. I think Garza himself would be close to Profar, who I think is extremely overrated and not that impressive with the bat. So you are willing to trade Garza, a prosoect better then Profar and the 2B equivalent of Profar for Profar. No Way.

              • Dudeski

                You’re kidding, right?

                • Blublud

                  Get off the status quo a form your opinion. I bet you don’t even know anything about profar. You just going by what you heard. I would trade any of our top 5 prospects for Profar.

                  • Blublud

                    Wouldn’t

                  • Timmy

                    yes as an olt-ternative, i would profar that deal

                  • hansman1982

                    I’d trade Soler, Baez and Almora for Profar.

                    • AD

                      Now that seems a little foolish…

                    • Timmy

                      this is why you work in plumbing

                    • hansman1982

                      Not all three of them. Just one-for-one

                    • Serious Cubs Fan

                      hansman1982: Soler, Baez and Almora could net us Giancarlo Stanton. Profar is still unproven

                    • AD

                      Okay that makes me feel a little better about the situation.

                    • hansman1982

                      “hansman1982: Soler, Baez and Almora could net us Giancarlo Stanton. Profar is still unproven”

                      I misstated. I would trad Soler, Baez OR Almora for Profar.

              • bbmoney

                That’s absurd. 2.5 months of garza is not even in the same area code value wise.

                • Blublud

                  Right, and I think Profar is the next Barney. I would trade Barney for 2.5 months of Garza if I’m in a pennant race.

              • Isaac

                Dead on BB. Wouldn’t give up Baez straight up for Profar, let alone two other solid pieces.

            • turn two

              Nah we`d need more. If Garza nets two top pitching arms and olt, then you are trading 2 top arms olt Barney and our prized ss prospect for their prized ss prospect.

          • Ben (BG2383)

            I would be all over that. Profar > Baez for certain and Barney doesn’t hit enough for that to have any sway.

            • bbmoney

              I mean not for sure. But he’s got a much higher floor, lower risk, and similar ceiling (value just from different things).

              • Ben (BG2383)

                I should have clarified that by better I meant a more certain gamble. I meant better prospect. Baez has the potential to be an amazing player obviously but I worry that he could bust. I think profar will be a first division talent and I have a lot more faith in his floor.

                • Blublud

                  Right, because a guy who will probably hit .250-.260 with much less power and batter defense is sure to be much better the Baez. This not about Baez, I just think Profar is extremely overrated. The guy has very limited hitying skills.

                  • bbmoney

                    You asked for scouting reports yesterday. Show me the scouting report that projects profar for that.

                    Unless its just your scouting report. You have no basis for any of this.

                    • Mr. B. Patient

                      I think that’s just BluBlud’s opinion. He thinks Baez’s ceiling is higher than Profar. Profar is the same age as Baez and playing in the majors, so he is much more advanced.

                  • hansman1982

                    In A ball, Profar was a full year younger than Baez but posted a wOBA only .030 points lower while having a BB rate 3 times higher and half the K rate.

                    Brett Jackson had a better K rate in A ball than Baez.

                    • Dudeski

                      The amount of walks Profar drew for such a young player is redonkulous

                    • Cubbie Blues

                      “Brett Jackson had a better K rate in A ball than Baez.” Ouch , man, ouch.

                    • Serious Cubs Fan

                      Cubbie Blues: Yeah, but Jackson was older then Baez at that level. He had more at bats under his belt

                    • Serious Cubs Fan

                      Cubbie Blues: Sorry that comment wasn’t meant for you. I agree the comparison is irrelevant.

        • Serious Cubs Fan

          Yep, We can’t pawn off our garbage or unwanted parts for a teams best prospect

    • bbmoney

      No chance on profar.

  • MIke

    Looks like the cubs may be pushing soriano in on the garza deal. Rangers looking for a right handed hitting outfielder

    • bret epic

      Then we can see Lake starting in left.

  • Stogie

    How can you all be thrilled with a package of A ball players? It’s common sense: the more advanced players we get, the sooner this team’s fortunes improve. For 2 yrs, all this FO has done has been doing is stockpiling low minors talent. That spells many more yrs of struggling Cubs teams. Theo and Jed are backwards when it comes to advancing players. Winning teams such as the Braves and Cardinals, are not afraid to call up players from AA, the Braves have an extensive history of letting players make the team straight from A level (such as Rafael Furcal). Albert Pujols never played above A ball. Yet Theo believes a player has to have 1,500 minor league ABs. As if all players are the same.

    • Cheese Chad

      Winning teams like the Braves and Cards have had this talent in the minors for the last 10 years. The Cubs haven’t. It has to start somewhere. They are building not to be great in 2014 or 2015 but from 2015-2020. This has been said on this site many times, it’s a process.

    • Jed Jam Band

      Nobody has even once suggested a package of all A-Ball players. In Texas’ case, let’s talk about Olt/Jackson/Edwards. Two of those guys are in A ball, sure, but one is in AAA. In the case of the other teams, the guys mentioned have rarely been A ball guys. You have to stop cherry-picking info to make your point.

    • Blublud

      I agree with you about the at-bats and calling up players. Theo slow rolling prospect irritates the shit out of me. I also think that had something to do with Bryant signing issues.

      However, I totally disagree with the Garza deal. They will secure talent. Top talent is better then ready talent, which is why I don’t want Perez as the center . He seems to be more of a MLB ready guy, but definitely not the best prospect. Plus, if the deal is the three stated, then you have a MLB ready guy, a guy who’s ready for AA and an A baller. That sounds about right.

      • bbmoney

        I disagree that the cubs low roll their prospects. And I really doubt that factored into the Bryant signing discussions.

        • bbmoney

          *slow……sigh

    • Tim

      That’s why Lake got called up TODAY, because he had 1,500 at bats at triple A…….wait, no he didn’t. You have no idea what you are talking about, thank you for displaying your lack of knowledge.

  • Timmy

    theo will overplay his hand and then fold for a worse deal, again. but not before he figures out a way to put garza in a position in which he gets injured again before the trade.

    • Timmy

      If Theo actually gets a good deal, I’m crap my depends

      • Timmy

        nice try, you haven’t figured out the stylistics of my unique grammar and argumentative approach

  • Cheese Chad

    I wonder if Garza is intently watching these updates on bleachernation as we all are.

    • Mason Asher

      I wonder if he is watching us and thinking to himself “these guys are idiots”

      • hansman1982

        “these guys are idiots, cept for that Hansman guy, he’s the cat’s pajama’s”

      • Cheese Chad

        Haha, I wouldn’t blame him.

  • Blublud

    A package of Edwards, Jackson and Olt would be very good, so if the Cubs are holding out for more, and they get it, then this will be considered a great deal.

    • Crockett

      Yep. For just Garza, it would be. If pieces start being added, I think the Cubs are definitely moving into Neftali Feliz land.

      • Andrew

        id settle for neftali triste at this point

  • Whiteflag

    I know everyone is talking about flipping Olt, but why not hold onto him for a year. We are “buying low on him,” so why are we going to sell him “low.” I’d like to give him a shot to gain some value, who would he be blocking? Bryant is a few years away. Any thoughts…

    • Jed Jam Band

      Well, the thought here is that we’d be flipping him for a pitching prospect or even two who are high-impact guys.

      • Whiteflag

        Yeah, I guess on the right deal. I just would like to see if he continues to improve since he has had the vision thing corrected. Just think he might be more valuable down the line.

    • http://www.hookersorcake.com hookersorcake

      Olt might loose all value by the end of the year. If we can flip him via 3 way trade for a pitching prospect in the top 100. I think that would be ideal.

      • Mr. B. Patient

        If some team felt that strongly about Olt, wouldn’t they just contact Texas themselves? I agree with Whiteflag, if we get Olt, start him at 3rd, and hope we catch lightning in a bottle. It’s not like he’s blocking anyone.

        Never been a big Olt fan, but if he’s not the key piece, I’m with taking a chance.

    • jpeck

      I like it. IF his eye problem was holding him back, and IF Manny is able to help him, I would like to think he can turn it around. I dont see the Cubs trading for him and then trading him right away. Makes little sense to me.

    • CubsFaninMS

      You have a point. I was reading a comments section on MLB Trade Rumors and the general consensus with Texas fans is “Yeah, let’s give them Olt!”

      • Serious Cubs Fan

        Do rangers fan’s realize Olt is not a stud anymore and that Cubs fan for the most part aren’t high on him? Typical case of fans overvaluing their own prospects

        • CubsFaninMS

          No, the thread I read was them wanting to get rid of him. They see the same bust potential that we do.

    • Timmy

      olt is terrible, he’s old for a prospect and isn’t producing. we’ll trade a top pitcher for the next washout.

  • willis

    Ship off Garza for nothing that will help anytime soon. Good deal.

  • Dumpgobbler

    Im right with you Luke, Switch Alfaro with Olt and Im a happy man. Hard to beat Alfaro, Jackson and Edwards. Hell, Sickel has Edwards at #73 in his updated top MLB prospects list.

  • Mike

    I’m struggling a little with this deal to Texas and bringing back a 3rd baseman, who seems like some damaged goods when compared to the upside of some of our prospects currently in the system who could play 3rd. I’m more familiar with NBA trades which involve 3 or 4 teams and am wondering if this can be done in baseball…if this is the case it would make sense in taking on a 3rd base prospect if we can deal him or any other to another team for some pitching.

  • Timmy

    BREAKING NEWS: A-Rod Returning Monday

  • abe

    is it possible we are dealing with a brett jackson olt swap?

    • Serious Cubs Fan

      Olt’s stock is still higher

      • abe

        i mean as part of a bigger deal..

  • Mason Asher

    If this trade was made available I would jump at the opportunity.
    DBacks get:
    Garza
    Gregg
    Jackson
    Throw in.

    Cubs get : Skaggs/Bradley
    Eaton
    Charles Brewer
    Jake Bennett.

    Never gonna happen. They could get desperate though since the Dodgers are off and running.

  • Timmy

    BREAKING NEWS: Garza traded for Dontrelle Willis

    • #23

      Timmy, why don’t u stop with the stupid “breaking news” jokes. it is getting so annoying.

      • Timmy

        its true, my name puns are much slicker

    • DarthHater

      [img]http://weknowmemes.com/generator/uploads/generated/g1374207850581174145.jpg[/img]

      • Timmy

        i give this a C-, my name puns were much funnier than this tonight. olt-imatelly you could do much better if you profar-ed

        • DarthHater

          I save my good material for Die hard. You’ll have to get a lot more annoying before I’ll waste it on you. :-P

          • Timmy

            this can be arrange, though i don’t have as much time coming up as i did last week

      • hansman1982

        The scientists clarified their statement. They were amazed it took him this long.

  • todd mccombs

    If the Cubs can get Olt and 2 pitchers in rangers top 10 prospects – They better take it and run – Olt vision problems are behind him – been hitting and driving in runs of late- Ranger fans believe Olt is overpaying for Garza why throw in two pitching prospects.

    Olt is 24 – was a top 20 prospect in all baseball until vision problems which he now has over come. He has started looking like the prospect he was at the start of the year. He instantly becomes a possible gold glove player. Crazy what people are saying on this board.

    • Believe in 2015

      He struck out three times tonight against the Iowa Cubs

      • Kramden

        Baez struck out three times tonight also. Does he suck too?

        • Matty Ice

          4 times actually. 14 in 38 AA ab’s

        • Kyle

          If those 3 Ks were a continuation of a severe AAA problem and he was about to turn 25, then yes.

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

            I see what you did there…

          • hansman1982

            Or if those 3 Ks were a continuation of a severa A-ball problem that is combined with an inability to draw a walk and/or hit over .300, then ya.

    • http://deepcenterfield.blogspot.com Jason Powers

      Olt is 25 come August 27. He’ll be nearly 26 unless the FO decides to put him at the hot corner straight out.

      Was a top 20. Not saying he can’t come back to be the awesome force, just I’d rather get a guy that has been consistent in his minors career, or drastically improved throughout. AAA turns guys into AAAA players aplenty.

      http://www.milb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?pos=3B&sid=t102&t=p_pbp&pid=592609 In his last 10 games, 10 Ks in 32 PA or 27 AB. His contact rate is just…not what I would want throughout his career. http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=olt—001mic

      Let someone else bite on Olt. If they hit, great. Why do the Cubs need to take him, is the better question.

      The pitching prospects part I AGREE with you on. But I’ll pick a different player than Olt. Just me.

      • Dudeski

        Olt is 24 going on 25, not 25 going on 26

        • http://deepcenterfield.blogspot.com Jason Powers

          By the time 2014 season starts, he’ll be 25 years and 7 months.

      • Mr. B. Patient

        Cubs Den is reporting that Alfaro is in play. Rather take that shot over Olt, if it’s true.

    • Serious Cubs Fan

      Guys who are top 20 prospects fail ALL THE TIME. Vitters use to be in there. Corey patterson was #2, #3 in all of baseball, back to back years and look at him now. Your ranking means nothing. Just because he once was a top 20 guy doesn’t mean he will end up being a star player. He has proven with his play this year he isn’t a top 20 guy. You could make the argument that its just a bad year, but he’s 25 and terrible at the player in an extremely friendly PCL league

      • ssckelley

        Vitters was never a top 20 prospect.

      • http://deepcenterfield.blogspot.com Jason Powers

        Amen.

        I fought on message boards about Co Pat being not the player we all wanted him to be.
        K’d alot, no eye or plate discipline, and tried to muscle up on every pitch. A 5’10″ dude wanting 35 HRs +.
        http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=patter001don

        • Cubman23

          Wow, I forgot just how mediocre Patterson’s career was. His minor league stats are confusing as hell to read – he was up and down practically every year.

          And he walks away from the game with $15 million having accomplished nothing. These ballplayers have it made in the shade.

          • Serious Cubs Fan

            Don’t forget he gets a sick pension too. Set for life

        • Oswego chris

          Patterson had a big loopy swing, and the first time you saw him play you knew that swing wasn’t right…he could run…hit for pop if he connected…nice 4th outfielder…

  • rabbit

    I wouldn’t mind olt if he wasn’t the main piece of the trade…i wouldn’t mind swapping b jackson for olt…see if a change in scenery/coaching can help their careers

    • Mason Asher

      That’s actually sounds like a terrific idea.

      • http://deepcenterfield.blogspot.com Jason Powers

        Separate deal – or at least that would be in the package as clearly that kind of trade off.

Bleacher Nation Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Bleacher Nation is a private media site, and it is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago Cubs. Neither MLB nor the Chicago Cubs have endorsed, supported, directed, or participated in the creation of the content at this site, or in the creation of the site itself. It's just a media site that happens to cover the Chicago Cubs.

Bleacher Nation is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

Google+