Quantcast

matt garza cubsWith this morning’s Garza Watch post already loaded with comments and updates, I thought it might be useful to start a new post (especially considering the new information).

Today, Bruce Levine spoke to Matt Garza, who confirmed that he’s expecting to be traded. In a piece that you should definitely read, Levine quotes Garza: “They told my agent [earlier in the week] that they were going to move me. They said as much as they like me they need to add inventory for the future. I want to stay but that doesn’t seem possible now.”

Presumably, this came in part out of one-last-try negotiations on an extension. It would be understandable if Garza would prefer to test the market (he’s primed to get paaaaid), and understandable if the Cubs weren’t willing to commit full free agent market price at this time. Good on the Cubs for keeping Garza abreast of their plans. These are all people, you know.

Levine suggests that the Rangers, Indians, Blue Jays and Dodgers are or have been involved, with the Cubs seeking third baseman Lonnie Chisenhall in a deal from the Indians (with the Cubs sending back an infielder, potentially), and the Dodgers unwilling to part with their top two pitching prospects (presumably Zach Lee and Chris Reed or Julio Urias). All teams have been told to make their best and final offer.

We’ll see what ends up happening, but it sounds like a deal will happen before Garza’s scheduled start on Monday. It’s just a matter of finding the right trading partner to blink first.

UPDATE: Reports out of Boston – this one comes from Alex Speier – continue to say that the Red Sox feel comfortable with their starting pitching situation because Clay Buchholz will be back eventually, the other four in the rotation are doing all right, and there is a great deal of pitching depth at the upper levels of the minors. Posturing? Maybe. But Levine didn’t list the Red Sox, and they haven’t seemed like the strongest suitor at any point.

UPDATE 2 (11:43am CT): From Gerry Fraley out of Dallas, the Rangers’ offer is likely Mike Olt plus one of a group of young infield prospects (Fraley speculates Luis Sardinas, Leury Garcia, or Rougned Odor) plus a pitching prospect (Fraley mentions Neil Ramirez and C.J. Edwards). I’m just shooting from the hip here, but if the Cubs could get Olt, Edwards, and one of Odor or Sardinas … that’s looking like a mighty fine package to me.

UPDATE 3 (1:00pm CT): George Ofman chimes in to remind folks that this is not a done deal with the Rangers, and, yes, the Cubs are still working with other potential teams.

UPDATE 4 (1:02pm CT): A big one. Joe Davidson of the Sacramento Bee (who references Garza’s Freso connection, in case you’re wondering why someone in Sacramento would be reporting on this) says that a Cubs/Rangers deal is “99 percent done,” with the medicals now being evaluated. Davidson says there are six players involved, but that doesn’t mean it’s Garza for five players. It could be just about any combination. The medical step with Garza, who has had that stress reaction in his elbow, reportedly related to a screw that was placed there as a kid, isn’t totally perfunctory. In other words, the deal could be “99 percent done” and still kinda-sorta not be a “done deal,” if that makes sense. Not solely because of the medicals, mind you, but that’s a factor.

UPDATE 5 (1:13pm CT): Although he doesn’t yet know the other names involved, Davidson appears quite confident that Garza is going to Texas. Isn’t it funny how the last year has jaded us? Pre-Dempster Saga, we would all also be convinced that Garza to the Rangers was definitely happening, because obviously it’s happening. But now? You’re all probably feeling the way I do: yeah, seems likely he’ll go to the Rangers, and, yeah, seems likely it’ll be today or tomorrow. But nothing would surprise me anymore.

UPDATE 6 (1:38pm CT): Man, the ‘net is a wildfire of speculation about other Cubs’ names potentially being involved in this deal. It’s certainly possible that other Cubs will be in, but no big names have been reported anywhere. In other words, I’d be very, very surprised if Alfonso Soriano was suddenly in this deal (especially considering his no-trade rights) and we didn’t hear a peep about it. A lower-profile, or non-obvious trade target type? Sure. It’s possible.

UPDATE 7 (3:18pm CT): Jesse Rodgers says that we can expect to hear something on a Garza trade today or tomorrow (though he added a “?,” so there’s probably some speculation there).

UPDATE 8 (3:35pm CT): An ESPN report out of Dallas has Jim Bowden saying that Neil Ramirez has “emerged as the center piece” of a Garza deal. That would be pretty surprising given that the other names reportedly discussed – Mike Olt, C.J. Edwards, etc. – are generally thought to be better prospects. Might Ramirez be in the deal? Sure. Might he be an important piece? Sure. The “center piece”? Implying that the other pieces are far inferior? That would be a surprise.

UPDATE 9 (3:55pm CT): Garza is still with the Cubs in Colorado, doing his normal warm-ups, per Patrick Mooney.

UPDATE 10 (4:03pm CT): Gordon Wittenmyer has a Cubs source who says a mystery NL team could pop up and “intercept” Garza from the Rangers. If there was one thing this process was missing, it was a mystery team … (Pirates? Diamondbacks? Cardinals? Dodgers? They were the most frequently mentioned NL teams.)

UPDATE 11 (4:43pm CT): Jim Bowden tweets something that will probably be unpopular, but backs up UPDATE 8: “The Rangers – Cubs…Matt Garza deal will get done and Neil Ramirez will be center piece according to source.” If the deal truly ends up being Garza for Ramirez and then a lesser prospect or two, I would be surprised. I’ve said all along that I expected a return less than the Greinke deal last year, though – something more in the realm of a top 100 and then a couple top 15 organizational types – so you’re encouraged to keep expectations reasonable, however this plays out.

UPDATE 12 (4:46pm CT): BP’s Jason Parks expresses – in his unique, colorful way – disbelief about Ramirez being the “centerpiece” of a Garza deal: “Neil Ramirez might be in the Garza deal, but if he’s the centerpiece of the deal (which I doubt), the Cubs are getting [um, a bad deal].”

UPDATE 13 (4:53pm CT): Bowden reports that Ramirez has been scratched from his scheduled start tonight, which could be nothing, could be an injury, or could be holding him out in advance of a trade. We’ll dig into that one a bit.

UPDATE 14 (4:58pm CT): Hooray for conflicting reports (at least temporarily) – T.R. Sullivan says Ramirez is still in line to start tonight. Maybe he just hasn’t heard yet, or maybe Bowden jumped the gun.

UPDATE 15 (5:02pm CT): Bowden retracts and does a little mea culpa: “I am now being told that Neil Ramirez wasn’t scratched.Was given wrong information. My fault for not following up with 2nd source #apologies” Not that you needed another reminder after the last year, but: take the information, all of it, with a grain of salt. It’s interesting, it’s useful, it’s fun. But we live in an era where things happen quickly and mistakes are made. Try to stay calm throughout the process, and just enjoy.

UPDATE 16 (5:17pm CT): A report from Jeff Wilson (Star-Telegram) suggests (but does not state explicitly outright) that the deal on the table is Garza and an unidentified Cubs player for Olt, Ramirez, Edwards, and Luis Sardinas. If true, I’d expect the other Cubs piece to be something fairly good, as Sardinas is a legit prospect (good enough that you could argue he’s the best prospect in the deal … hard to say who the “centerpiece” is). That six player deal would comport with the original Joe Davidson report (UPDATE 4).

UPDATE 17 (6:14pm CT): Tim Brown tweets that the “final stage” of the deal has been reached, with the exchange of medical information having taken place. Joe Davidson’s original report included that bit, so it’s fair to guess that evaluating – and then discussing within the context of the trade – those medicals has taken some time. Neil Ramirez is still pitching (at last check), so, if he’s in the deal, we haven’t yet reached the stage of bro hugs.

  • Boba Fett

    Rougned Odor looks to be a really good young 2B prospect. Really wish we could get Olt and spin him off for more pitching, Edwards, Odor and a pitcher like Jackson. Just throw additional pieces along with Garza.

    Any more updates Assman22?

    • Chad

      Sardinas over Odor IMO. I think if you bring those guys in you may be planning to flip them and Sardinas is not only more highly regarded/ranked, he plays a more premiere position for trade (Or keep if you don’t think Alcantra or Baez can stick at SS and you plan to move Castro eventually). I feel like 2B is easier to fill than SS and you never know if Sardinas wouldn’t move over to 2B either. Sardinas gives much more flexibility from all angles.

    • JR

      I like the way they refer to the players involved as inventory. That certainly gives you more pieces (flexibility) and you haven’t ended up with just 1 center piece.

  • Kramden

    Sardinas and Edwards work for me and I’ll take my chances that all the scouts and pundits were right about Olt the first time around.

  • twinkletoez

    “I’m just shooting from the hip here, but if the Cubs could get Olt, Edwards, and one of Odor or Sardinas … that’s looking like a mighty fine package to me.”

    This this this, please this!

    • http://www.hookersorcake.com Hookers or Cake

      yeah I think I prefer that package with Jackson instead of Olt

  • jh03

    That update 2 package is very solid, IMO. Lets hope that rumor has some legs.

  • North Side Irish

    Chris Cotillo ‏@ChrisCotillo 4m
    #Cubs source indicates that #Rangers didn’t take Luke Jackson off the table in talks…the #Cubs had players evaluated higher than him.

    • jh03

      Was just going to post this. Surprising to me, actually… I wonder how that changes things.

    • Rebuilding

      This is a really strange leak to me. First, that they are monitoring the media this closely or would respond to the question. Second, it seems like this is the most definitive thing yet to say its definitely Texas since they are already defending the return

      • bbmoney

        Could just be the source was asked specifically about Jackson rather than him or her rushing to quell reports the FO read on twitter.

    • CubsFaninMS

      I just get a mental picture of Epstein and Daniels at a poker table and a reporter leaning in and asking “How do you feel about your hand, Mr. Epstein?”

  • mister_rob

    really hope Odor isnt part of the return. I’ve heard he stinks

    • Stinky Pete

      That was horrible.

      • King Jeff

        Yeah, don’t make fun of people with smelly names. Right Stinky?

      • itzscott

        Actually, I’m still chuckling at my desk over that one.

        My co-workers probably think I have gas again.

    • babe ruth

      nothing that a whole bottle of axe body spray cant fix.

  • http://Bleachernation Lou Brock

    Texas AAA affiliate played Iowa last night and Mike Olt played at third. He had 2 throwing errors and 3 K’s at the plate. Not exactly making a good impression on Cubs brass. I would think Texas needs to rework their offer if they keep insisting on dumping Olt on Cubs I think Cubs move on to next best offer – Indians or Bosox.

    • bbmoney

      At least he avoided the golden sombrero.

  • cubchymyst

    Was hoping for more than a Low A pitcher for Garza, even though Edwards stats are intriguing as hell. However, I’d rather have the front office grab a position prospect that has a better chance of working out then settle for a pitcher who at best a middle reliever. If a position becomes crowded the cubs can trade for a pitcher and the FO has already displayed the ability to find good pitchers in Feldman and Maholm the past years.

    • cubchymyst

      *I am hoping….

      Can’t wait to see what this deal ends up being.

    • Funn Dave

      At the same time, though, our farm system is not terribly strong, pitching-wise. Edwards may not be the guy to remedy that, but I don’t think the FO should target position players over pitching just because they had two pitchers with relatively low expectations turn out really well. Don’t forget, they also gave Jackson big money, and he’s been our worst starter overall so far.

      • cubchymyst

        I don’t think they should target position players over pitching, I’m saying they should target the best prospects available. If the choice with Texas is a pitching prospect that is likely a bullpen pitcher or a position player who looks like they could be an above average starter I’d rather have the position player. I was hoping for some more pitching back when the trade Garza, but I’ll be happy with a solid prospect package even if it lacks a lot of pitching.

        • Funn Dave

          I’ll back that. It’s almost always good to go for talent over need–even if we don’t end up with a place for them, they can still be valuable trade pieces.

  • 100 Years of Tears

    Not sure if it means anything, but Mike Olt’s status on mlb.com is listed as ‘Reassigned’.

    • Kubphan82

      Ahhh I need a new update… I can’t go withou them… Need… Update…… Now…

    • Van

      It just means he is no longer with the ML club, as in “reassigned to AAA Round Rock”.

  • Lou Brown

    Odor looks like a good prospect, .800+ OPS, at A+. Only nineteen, and an awesome name to boot. I would be happy with Olt, Edwards, and him.

  • Serious Cubs Fan

    Whose better: Rougned Odor (2B) or Luis Sardinas (SS)? I know SS is a more premium position but which one has the higher ceiling?

    • North Side Irish

      I’d take Odor…have seen multiple sources question Sardinas’ work ethic. He’s talented, but I don’t want any part of that.

      • Serious Cubs Fan

        Is Odor a fringe top 100 guy? I get he is extremely young for his level, but as he gets into higher levels, top 100 guy you think?

    • Cub Fan in Hickory(Mike S)

      Id go with Odor, That kid can really hit, looks like Pedroia 2.0

  • KidCubbie

    This is going to be kind of funny if we end up trading him to someone other than the Rangers.

    • Kubphan82

      It’ll be kind of funny when, before the Cubs trade Garza, we hear that the rangers trade Olt fr Gallardo… Lol (never going to happen)

  • Ivy Walls

    Olt, Edwards and Ramirez, if that is the haul for Garza it is a good deal, though I suspect Cubs are throwing back someone, (Vitters or Jackson)

    Olt is 24, much like Rizzo from the right side and at the other corner. He averages a HR every 17 AB’s and has a .873 OPS in 4 seasons in the minors, a 1st Round (supplemental) and 49th overall in 2010, considered in the TOP 50 prospects this year consensus at AAA.

    Ramirez 24, also a first round draft pick 44th overall RHP out of HS is presently in AA, he was demoted from AAA last year. He has a 590 k’s to 236 BB in 536 IP, better than 2 to 1

    EJ Edwards, 21, the 48 round super sleeper is 6’2″ skinny 160 lbs, blossoming RHP has 207 K’s to 59 BB. almost 3 to 1 in 160 IP, is still in A ball…he is doing something right without a 95 MPH’er and it is said he can bend it.

    • bbmoney

      Olt’s on a couple midseason top 50′s still (actually just 1 that I can remember). But he slid off a lot of them. Stock seems to be slipping and his K rates are alarming, eye issues not withstanding.

    • Part of the Core

      With Olt’s high strike out rate, he sounds more like Jackson than Rizzo. Also, Olt’s rated as a plus defender (as are Jackson and Rizzo). Jackson has plus speed, unlike Olt and Rizzo.

      With all three of these guys, the lights can come on at any time. They’re all talented and serviceable (average MLB players), but can they adjust to MLB play become all stars?

    • Kyle

      Rizzo broke into the majors at a much younger age. They aren’t comparable.

  • http://Bleachernation Lou Brock

    How about Cubs get LHP Claudio from Texas instead of Olt. This guy has had great numbers all the way up to AA this year and would fit nicely in bullpen with Russell.

    • Chad

      Do you mean instead of Russell? I bet he is traded eventually or as part of a package deal.

  • Adventurecizin’ Justin

    I know pitching is our systems biggest need, but I hope Garza brings us upside prospects regardless of position. We can trade for pitching when we have a robust system. Speculating is fun, but I hope Garza doesn’t pitch another game for us until next year! Ha

    • CubsFaninMS

      Pitching is our weakness in the upper minor leagues, not necessarily with the MLB club. We’ve definitely had some bullpen issues, but our starting pitchers have been great. Although I think it’s a good idea to shoot high for nearly MLB-ready pitching prospects, I would think it’s not a necessity. We’ve done just fine acquiring good starting pitching in the offseason. Why not continue that trend, let our young pitching prospects develop, and feel free to choose which prospect in trades that we feel are worth the most? Just my thougths.

  • Dustin S

    I had wondered if Chisenhall would be in play at all with the Indians, especially since he and Olt are somewhat comparable prospects. I’d take Olt over Chisenhall though between the 2. Chisenhall shows glimpses of being good at times, but I’d much rather have a guy that struggled in a cup of coffee in the bigs in Olt, who has a chance at being really good after his eye issues and possibly improved swing.

    Chisenhall had even fairly meh numbers in the minors generally, and his ceiling is probably not more than a .250 20HR guy. .254 in over 500 big-league AB over 3 years, so it’s a lot more certain what you’re getting in him but also a much lower ceiling. From a player standpoint, he’s almost like what they had hoped to get in Ian Stewart. A little more average and a little less pop, but close.

  • Internet Random

    I keep seeing “odor of sardines” until I read more closely.

    • On The Farm

      I second this

  • King Jeff

    Joe Davidson ‏@SacBee_JoeD 2m

    Matt Garza (Fresno St) trade from Cubs to Rangers is “99 percent done.” Teams going over medical records now. 6 players in the mix

    • Stinky Pete

      Crap. And I was just about to give up and get some work done.

    • Kyle

      I’m going to giggle so hard when the Rangers find something ambiguous on Garza’s MRI that blows everything up, but the Cubs insist is no big deal.

      • King Jeff

        I don’t think giggling is going to be my response. Maybe like a mad cackle or something.

        • Dale’s Ear

          yeah my giggle would be more like tom hanks laughing at his bath tub in the money pit

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

      I’m guessing 2 going, 4 coming back.

    • Tim

      Never heard of this guy, is he reliable?

      • King Jeff

        Yeah, he’s a legit sports guy.

    • ChrisN324

      99%?!

      This is like a slooowwww software update on my computer. I want it to be over with dammit! My work productivity can handle a little more stalling i guess.
      That 6 players part is intriguing though, wonder who goes out from our side with Garza.

  • Mike W

    I find this ridiculous. Garza wants to stay, he’s putting up good numbers and will do so when the cubs are competitive. Why are the cubs looking to get rid of such a great player for a crap shoot of players? Really Mike Olt and a few prospects. Ugh no thanks. Mike Olt is a 3rd baseman I do recall, and I am pretty sure Kris Bryant will knock him out of the water in a couple years, so Mike Olt would be a waste. If the Cubs can not get great prospects in return then sign Garza to an extension and see him in the pitching rotation with Jeff Samardzija, Travis Wood, Edwin Jackson for the next 4+ years. Remember this is the CHICAGO CUBS not the Kansas Royals. The Cubs have money to spend for a top FA Starting Pitcher.

    • twinkletoez

      Because I hear Garza is looking for 5 years 90 mil and full no trade clause.. If you are the Cubs FO do you give him that deal?

      • On The Farm

        A 5 year extension with a NTC for Garza is a moot point. If he was extended by the Cubs he would get his 10-5 rights before the deal was up and the odds of the Cubs trading him before he got his 10-5 would be slim because it would signal they aren’t trying to win.

        • hansman1982

          But the NTC would stay with him if he allowed himself to be traded. 10/5 rights dissapear.

    • Rebuilding

      Or we could get some nice prospects for him during a lost season and re-sign him in the offseason. Garza is reportedly asking for too many years and/or too much money for the FO’s liking so we might as well get something for him

    • Tim

      I agree with your general point, but until the exact return is announced it doesn’t seem worth it to get all worked up over who ‘might’ be in a deal.

      This front office has done a pretty good job in trades so far. Between dealing for Rizzo, getting Wood from the Reds, the Feldman deal, most of their deals have been winners. The deal everyone points out and loves to hate on, Stewart from Colorado was not a bad deal for the Cubs. They needed a major league ready third baseman, they took a shot on a guy who had some previous success and was still young. He also had qualities you want, good D, solid plate approach, and plus power. It didn’t work out, that happens sometimes. Does anyone in here really miss Colvin or D.J. ? I don’t

    • Adam

      Sure, he wants to stay because he is loyal. But he like Dwight Schrute, is going wherever his loyalty is valued most.

    • Drew7

      “If the Cubs can not get great prospects in return then sign Garza to an extension”

      That would take both parties coming to an agreement, and it sounds like Garza wants a long-term deal. If he wants to test the open market, you *have* to trade him.

    • Josh

      If you’re the same guy from the espn boards please stop commenting everything you say is just stupid but that’s just my opinion

    • Eric

      I would love the Cubs to sign Garza to an extension but if they can’t find common ground on a contract now I completely understand the need to trade him and get value.

      Plus, it drives me crazy when people continually say “Why trade for Olt when we just drafted a 3B in Bryant?”. Talent is talent and you figure it out later. If we were in position to draft a very highly regarded shortstop in the draft next year would it make sense to pass him over because we have Castro and Baez? Absolutely not.

      A little over 6 hours until Pearl Jam!

  • Serious Cubs Fan

    If we get Olt who start at 3rd base at Iowa when Vitters is back? How will they get them all at bats?

    • DReese

      Vitters could play 1st

      • Austin8466

        Olt can play 1st as well.

        Definitely a non-issue.

        • On The Farm

          Or move one to the OF, either way, either way is fine.

          • Augiepb

            Vitters started in LF on his rehab last night in Arizona, probably no realation just can’t remember him ever doing that before

            • ssckelley

              He did play one game in left field for Iowa before he got hurt. If Olt does come here I think Vitters ends up on left field. Defensively Olt is much better at 3rd than Vitters.

      • Serious Cubs Fan

        Yeah, I’d feel with Olt be better in field at 3rd they probably more Vitters to 1st. But I’d really like to see Vitters get daily reps at 3rd base to at least try advance a little more at 3rd. Vitters will never be good at 3rd base but he still can improve and I feel getting the daily reps will help. If he improves his defense at 3rd base then that ups his stock and trade value for the future

        • On The Farm

          I think anybody getting Vitters in a deal would know what they are getting. I think the book has been written on Vitters that he will never be a good 3B and if anytime were to recieve him a deal would either have a huge black hole at 3rd, or know that he is probably moving to 1B/OF anyway.

          Just my take on it. I dont think he will increase his value by playing D, it will rest soley on his ability to hit.

  • Joey

    6 players in the mix? I’m thinking Garza + Navarro for 4 prospects

    • Tim

      Last night Assman was saying it was Garza/Gregg/Valbuena to the Indians being discussed. He also mentioned to be on the look out for something involving Barney. Maybe some of those names go in a separate deal, and you very well could be right about Navarro going with Garza. I just want to know. Anymore updates Assman??? Thanks in advance

    • itzscott

      I’m thinking Garza/Navarro/Vitters or Jackson for 3 of theirs

  • cjdubbya

    Isn’t the medicals exchange where Haren-for-Marmol blew up last winter?

    • On The Farm

      Well at least Garza hasn’t tweeted that its a done deal and he is heading to Texas or anything

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      Yes. It’s very rare, though. But Haren’s potential medical issues were well understood at the time to be a potential problem. Not sure it’s quite that severe with Garza.

  • Crockett

    I am ready to be done. My phone battery won’t make it through the game tonight with incessant updating.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      I want to be able to leave my computer to go pee without having to take my phone with me.

      • On The Farm

        Amen

  • X The Cubs Fan

    So we aren’t getting Joc Pederson or Bauer?

  • Serious Cubs Fan

    I’m really hoping we get Rougned Odor from Texas. Olt, Odor, Edwards, and maybe a couple lesser pieces.

  • Austin8466

    Joe Davidson sucks. Dude is as unprofessional as they come. ND fans got to see how wrong he generally is, and he loves to interject himself into stories.

    I hope he’s right, though.

  • cubchymyst

    Guess on Cubs return: I’m going with the 2 going and 4 coming back.

    Cubs: Olt, Edwards, Odor, Ramirez

    Rangers: Garza and Navarro

    • bbmoney

      I would love to trade the Rangers Catchers in back to back seasons.

  • Serious Cubs Fan

    If the trade is 6 player trade and Garza is 1 of them. Anyone think 1 of the other 5 will be a player we send to Texas?

  • DReese

    Prediction
    Garza and Sori (plus cash) to Rangers
    Olt, Sardinas, Jackson and Ramirez to Cubs

    I hope

    • Serious Cubs Fan

      This would be a dream deal, but swap Ramirez for Edwards and then it be perfect. But doubt this would happen. Thats a ton and I don’t think Texas wants Soriano even though he looks like a fit

      • DReese

        I would really like Jackson, mostly because Texas said we couldn’t have him.

    • King Jeff

      Ramirez only has one option year left, which takes some luster off of him to me.

      • Serious Cubs Fan

        Ramirez has live arm but he’s already 24 in AAA and is more of future bullpen guy in my eyes

    • Mr. B. Patient

      Not unless Texas eats a large portion of Sori’s contract. Or Ramirez out and Alfaro in.

      The first three Rangers listed seem to be in play for Garza alone. That makes Soriano for Ramirez. (which if your goal is to move Soriano, then I guess it’s okay).

      • DReese

        I just picked at random really but I think this will be more than we actually get.

    • Coop

      Looks good, but give me Edwards instead of Ramirez. I also like Odor and the catcher, though. Give ‘em all to us!

      Not very excited about Olt… so I guess my ideal return, if we are sending Garza and Sori would be:

      Jackson, Edwards, Sardinas/Odor, Ramirez/Catcher (damn, can’t remember his name)

      • Coop

        Alfaro – yeah that guy

      • DReese

        Alfaro?

      • DReese

        It seems like pitching is pretty weak in the Rangers system

  • Kukini

    Right now this just reeks of last year…PLEASE let’s move him before his next start.

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+