Quantcast

dodgers sign all the playersCuban pitcher Miguel Alfredo Gonzalez is currently considering his options before signing with a team, something that Jesse Sanchez reiterates he expects to happen this week. The prevailing wisdom on the big money 26-year-old righty is that the Dodgers, what with their diamond shoes and ivory shirts (uncomfortable, dude), will easily be able to outbid every other team, and Gonzalez will be theirs.

But what if the Dodgers aren’t as crazy about Gonzalez as we think they are?

Sources tell Ken Rosenthal that the Dodgers’ interest in Gonzalez is “not as fervent as some are portraying.” Everyone knows about the Dodgers’ deep pockets, so there is certainly an incentive on Gonzalez’s end to create or embellish interest by the Dodgers.

Then again, Peter Gammons hears that the Dodgers are planning to go to five years and almost $50 million for Gonzalez, and, if they do, Gammons’ source believes Gonzalez will sign with the Dodgers.

It’s a small tweet, but it implies that Los Angeles is Gonzalez’s preferred destination, and they just have to come up to near what another team (or two or five) is willing to pay. Might that “other” team be the Cubs?

We know that the Cubs have expressed interest, and we also know that payroll has trended strongly downward in the last two years. The money to sign Gonzalez should be there if the Cubs believe he’s worth the investment. But if Gammons’ source is right, it might not matter how much the Cubs bid (unless they go absolutely crazy, which isn’t necessarily advisable).

The scenario that’s been set up here is that, if the Cubs get Gonzalez, it looks like it will approach the five years and $50 million Gammons’ source notes (a very hefty investment for a very unproven player – we’re not talking about a Yu Darvish that has played upper level competition, openly for all to see, for several years before coming over). And it looks like it will be because the Dodgers decided he wasn’t worth that much.

Of course, Rosenthal’s report came several hours after Gammons’, and the latter had circulated widely by the time Rosenthal reported. That is to say, Rosenthal could have checked in on Gammons’ report, only to find that he was hearing something very different. If that’s the case, then a lot of this induction goes out the window. And let’s not develop tunnel vision: there are teams interested other than just the Cubs and Dodgers. Indeed, if it’s true that Gonzalez could help a team in the second half this year, then the Cubs might find themselves with slightly less inventive to land Gonzalez than other teams involved in the bidding.

These are just some things to consider as we watch his free agency play out this week. That said: if the Cubs get him, I’m going to be pleased, because this front office wouldn’t go all out on a guy they didn’t really like.

  • Andy

    This front office really is wise with their money. They have a ceiling for players’ worth, which is something we’re seeing bite the Yankees, Dodgers, and Angels in the ass. I don’t think this front office has a problem spending money, I think they have a problem flushing it down the toilet, and that is the right problem to have.

    • Jason

      Yup. What you said exactly.

    • Kyle

      Yeah. This front office *never* overpays for anything…

      • Cheese Chad

        You’ll have to be more specific…….

  • James

    I still like to see the Diamondbacks get into the Matt Garza derby. Maybe Archie Bradley, Matt Davidson, and another prospect for Matt Garza and a James Russell.

    • Tommy

      Sorry to burst your bubble but that will never happen. They won’t do Bradley straight up for Garza, let alone add Davidson and another guy. Even getting Skaggs is unlikely

      • SenorGato

        Im hoping for like 6 Eric Leals. Talented and extremely young so that I can be told to accept that major leaguers just aren’t as valuable as guys who might one day be major leaguers for cheap.

    • On The Farm

      I think Bradley for Garza and Russell is a good deal

      • Tommy

        Still think that’s pushing it a little bit. The top pitching prospect in baseball for a high-end number 3/low-end number 2 starter who is a rental and a lefty reliever with a couple years of control I just don’t see happening

        • On The Farm

          Oh no, you beat me to the post. What I meant was even getting Bradley alone for Garza and Russell is a good deal for the Cubs. Add in an interesting 3B prospect and another guy, and you got a deal with no arms or legs to run anywhere.

          • Tommy

            Ya I meant Arizona probably won’t consider Bradley straight up for Garza and Russell either haha

        • Patrick G

          I hate how people portray Garza as a low 2/ high 3. I think he is a low 1/high 2 and definitely undervalue. If you look at his numbers, never had an ERA over 4 and has pitched for teams with pretty bad offenses. James Shields has 3 seasons with ERA over 4, one being 5.18 just 3 years ago.

          And Bradley is not the top pitching prospect in the game, he’s up there, but Seattle has 2 studs, the Pirates have 2 great arms, Zach Wheeler’s still a prospect and don’t forget Dylan Bundy, although with TJS

          • YourResidentJag

            He came out the Twins system. This is an organization that knows how to develop players.

            • Patrick G

              Are you agreeing or disagreeing with me?

              • YourResidentJag

                Agree. Again the Twins organization knows how to develop players…at least with Terry Ryan at the helm.

            • SenorGato

              Garza was also apretty big deal as a prospect. Tore shit up in the minors.

              • Tommy

                Go to the Baseball America lists of the past and you’ll find yourself TONS of big deal prospects who are no longer in baseball haha

                • YourResidentJag

                  Except that Garza still is having a solid career…..sooo….

                  • Tommy

                    I’m just saying that being a really good prospect has no bearing on how you are as a Major Leaguer

                • SenorGato

                  Yep, and Garza is not one of them. He “only” went on to become the 2/3 starter of a WS team at 24, win the ALCS MVP that year, pitch for a WS contender for two more years, get tradedto Chicago and become a more refined pitcher…That’s worth like half price on a rental.

                  • Tommy

                    Garza is a low end 2/high end 3 and that had nothing to do with how he was as a “prospect” is all I’m trying to say. I am a huge Garza fan, but expectations need be tempered on a trade, a rental is not going to net you a top 20 prospect

                    • SenorGato

                      Expectations seem to be extremely tempered as it is. A high quality major leaguer, especially the harder to find high quality pitchers, are worth a high quality prospect. Being atop 20 prospect doesn’t grant you bust immunity and those guys all have their own flaws that cant be pushed aside by typing out where they rank on a list out there.

                      Why is prospect in quotes btw?

                    • Tommy

                      It felt right haha, and I’m not saying it guarantees you won’t bust, but teams aren’t willing to trade those types of guys for a rental, plain and simple. The Giants did it with Wheeler for Beltran and have been ripped for it ever since

                    • Patrick G

                      What about Shields for the best offensive prospect in the game? Yes, Shields wasn’t a rental, but receiving top pitching piece for a pennant run should net quality prospects.

                    • Tommy

                      I’m not saying it shouldn’t get quality prospects. A borderline top 50 as the centerpiece is about right, with a couple more organizational top 10 guys would be fair, but comparing 2 years of Shields to 3 months of Garza isn’t reasonable haha

                    • SenorGato

                      ….And Beltran is still a better player than Wheeler is, two full years later.

                      Pedestaling prospects because of list rankings is dumb. Wil Myers was just traded. Turner was traded last deadline and who even remembers or cares? Garza was traded as a prospect for a guywho was #1 on a lot of those lists. The wind will blow, the names will change, we forget the old ones, and the prospecting world moves on.

                    • SenorGato

                      Taveras > MyerS for best offensive prospect.

          • Tommy

            By people, do you mean pretty much every scout in baseball, because the general consensus is that he is at best a low 2. Bradley is a consensus top 10 prospect and the only one that is rated higher than him in some cases is Taijuan Walker

            • Patrick G

              Well I must be missing something because if you look at his stats(not counting rookie year):

              Highest BB/9: 3.5 and under 3 every other season
              K/9 for career is 7.6
              H/9 for career is 1.0

              Yes he’s not a stud #1, but for a team like the Pirates, Indians and Red Sox, he’s clearly the #1/#2 starter for those teams.

            • Chef Brian

              Thats crap, saying hes a low 2/solid 3. On what team? The Phillies of a couple of years ago. He’s a solid 2 on most teams in baseball and a low 1 on the Cubs and a few other teams. Its all subjective and based on the make up of your staff. Yes, he’s a three on a handful of teams but not the majority. The ranking of 1,2,3 etc is worthless for evaluation purposes.

              • Tommy

                This year, he’s a 3 on the Cubs, soooooo

                • SenorGato

                  Lol OK. If the Cubs were a playoff team there is no way Travis Wood starts over Garza.

                  OTOH that does go some way towards showing how useless that whole 1-2-3-4-5 system is.

                  • Tommy

                    It would be argument though. Samardzija would be 1, and there would be a debate between Garza and Wood at 2, thus making my argument that he is a borderline 2/3 haha

                    • SirCub

                      A couple weeks ago, I would’ve called him a 4.

                    • SenorGato

                      There would be nothing but the most superficial debate of who gets the nod between Garza and Wood. The idea that Wood is better is laughable if trying to be nice, horrendous in any other case.

                    • Tommy

                      Travis Wood has been one of the most, if not the most consistent pitchers in all of baseball this year (1st in MLB In quality starts). I’m not saying Garza doesn’t have better stuff, but Wood is as reliable as it gets right now

                    • SenorGato

                      Yah dude, squirrels find nuts all the time. That doesn’t make Wood the better ML talent nor does it make him a preferable pitcher. Besides ERA and QS, two key stats in this age for sure, is there any number that supports Wood being better?

                  • Chef Brian

                    If the Cubs were a playoff team I could see many situations where Garza would start over Samardzija and he would definitely start over Wood and he was an All Star this year. Based on ability and playoff history (he was an Alcs MVP) Garza when healthy is a legitimate 2 and he could be a one. But the ranking system is flawed. So…we’re back to 1-2. :)

                • Patrick G

                  He’s a 3 on the Cubs now? Who’s ahead of him?

                  • Tommy

                    Samarzija for sure, and it’s a toss up between Garza and Wood

                    • SenorGato

                      You realize that Samardzija and Wood have never even pitched a full season, let alone that+, right?

                    • Patrick G

                      If I had to pitch one person for a 1 game playoff with this roster, Garza hands down gets the nod. Shark has filthy stuff but hasn’t put it all together and can be inconsistent and control issues

          • http://www.viewfromthebleachers.com Norm

            He’s only a 1/2 if you believe there are 30 #1’s in MLB.

            • SenorGato

              I am 100% confident Garza is a top 30 rotation talent. That is a big deal towards doing stuff like winning games, series’, and championships. Its something these super untouchable, infallible prospects would be ecstatic to become.

              • Noah

                You think Garza is one of the 30 best starting pitchers in baseball? Among starting pitchers with at least 50 innings, this is where Garza ranks in these categories:

                FIP: 66
                xFIP: 61
                K/9: 45
                BB/9: 64
                ERA: 40

                So even ERA, and most would say his ERA has benefited from playing some really bad teams over his most recent stretch, doesn’t put him in the top 30 in baseball.

                Most in the analytics community would argue there are only about 15 true 1s in baseball at any time. Based on the above, though, I’m not really sure how anyone could make a reasonable argument that Garza is anything more than a solid 2, and the 2/3 is probably a stronger argument.

                • Chef Brian

                  The 1-5 ranking system is horribly flawed, thats how an argument can be made for Garza’s ranking.

                • Lance

                  Take out Garza’s one bad game. Then what do the stats look like?

                  • On The Farm

                    Do you get to take out every SP worst game, or just Garza’s?

                  • mak

                    Do we take out each pitcher’s worst game then? Always hated the “take out his one bad inning” argument, because our understanding of stats/rankings/etc necessarily includes the pitcher’s worst game.

                    • On The Farm

                      Exactly maybe we shouldn’t count a SP’s best game too because it doesn’t seem very fair to count those too.

                  • Lance

                    just garza’s son, Do relieve every ace of their status after one bad start? In all of his starts this season i can only remember one being truly awful which did inflate his numbers a bit

                    • Lance

                      Ok i just saw the stat line for garzas first four starts and he pitched like a number 5, forget what he did for me lately im glad this ship is sailing…..

                • SenorGato

                  50 innings doesn’t sound very SP-y. That’s just this year.

                  From ’08-’13 hes 32 in fWAR. Hes 62nd in FIP, but has 2-3 times the innings of many in front of him. Fewer still have playoff experience.

            • Kyle

              Why are you trying to define the terms when we can just argue over them without specifying, thus making agreement and understanding impossible?

          • mdavis

            i agree i wann see the Diamondbacks, but no way we get Skaggs or Bradley. I think some combo of Davidson, Holmberg, Trahan, Owings, Delgado could get a deal done.

          • On The Farm

            “And Bradley is not the top pitching prospect in the game”

            Really? Fangraphs has him at #4 (top pitcher)
            Sickels has him #6 (only behind Walker)

            So to say he isn’t the top pitching prospect in baseball seems a little silly on your part considering one service has him #1 another #2, and the difference between being ranked #4 and #6 (Sickels rankings of Walker and Bradley is very, very small)

            • Patrick G

              Depends who you ask. MLB has him at 21 overall and 6-7 pitchers ahead of him. Not saying he’s not a good prospect, but others have reached higher rankings and succeeded and would like to see h pitch more than a half season at AA before naming him the top pitching prospect

              • Tommy

                MLB’s rankings were pre-season, while the Sickels and Fangraphs ones On the Farm was referring to are both mid-season ranking. BIG difference

                • Patrick G

                  Yes but will think Walker, Bundy Hultzen are better prospects. Maybe a personal preference but that’s just how I see it

                  • On The Farm

                    I am sorry, I don’t know you, so no offense, but I trust experts who rank Bradley over Bundy and Hultzen, and one of those guys have him over all three.

                  • Tommy

                    Agree with OTF. These guys that rank them watch boatloads of tape and usually get to see all the top guys in person, so I trust their rankings over yours (again, no offense)

                    • Patrick G

                      None taken. Just an opinion and what ive read up on. Where all disagreeing on who’s better than who but of course would love to see him in cubbie blue

          • Cheese Chad

            I agree. When people say “he was just a .500 pitcher with the Rays.” I’d be interested to see the records of the number 1’s and 2’s pitching in the AL east during that stretch. And he also was on an up-and-coming Rays team that was finally starting to develop. That’s like pointing to Shark and saying he’s a 5 on most teams because his record is terrible.

  • Cubswin

    Brett any idea if Baker is starting Friday for Kane County? I’m catching their game and it would be nice to see him pitch

  • cubsin

    Two words: Geraldo Concepcion.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      Fortunately they are not the same person.

      Otherwise, I’d be able to counter your Gerardo Concepcion with any number of other Cuban players who have had success in MLB.

      • Patrick G

        Where has he been? Hasn’t he been sick or something? Mono?

    • On The Farm

      mono nucleosis

    • ssckelley

      Oh my gosh, I totally forgot all about him. The Cubs should never take another chance on a Cuban prospect again.

      Thanks for the reminder!

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

        Maybe a more relevant compare: Daisuke Matsuzaka at 26 years old.

        While he seemingly had two good seasons, his FIP was over 4.00 his entire stay with the Bo Sox. He’s in Cleveland, last reports.

        I would be wary of 50 million in a pitcher’s arm at 26, that has not endured a full MLB season.

        That said, if the Dodgers want to, that’s their poison.
        Stay the investment approach in smaller, more reasonable increments. That way, no one investment can be seen as a epic fail.

        International is the way to go, but sometimes the hype drives the price up. No thanks.

  • Mick

    (this is my re-post from the previous MAG thread)

    He looks really good, here’s his last start in Tijuana: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py566m8xD6M

    You can see him settle down after his first 15 or so pitches and it looks like he has very good command of the strike zone. He mixes his fastballs really well, it looks like he uses both a 4 and 2-seamer. The 4-seamer looks to come in on a RH batter and sits between 91-94 mph (he hit 96 once) and the 2-seamer tails away from a RH batter and sits between 87-89 mph. He’s also got a slider he throws in the low-80′s and a slower curve he throws around 75. These seem to be his off-speed stuff because I didn’t see any change-ups.

    The thing that impressed me the most was his advanced command, this is no recent draft pick that can’t throw strikes. This guy is polished, worked the strike zone hard for his entire start, and has a smooth, repeatable delivery that hides the ball nicely until its release. His arm looked really fresh and I didn’t see any herky jerky arm action that put undue stress on his elbow or shoulder. I would definitely agree that his move into a MLB rotation or bullpen would be swift. Although, I don’t think he’d be a difference maker for a playoff contending team this season because he just doesn’t have wipe-out stuff and there are a couple of things he needs to work on.

    Such as, he didn’t seem to have a good strategy to get LH’s out. Also he started to lose a little command later in the game. The command thing might just be a conditioning issue with however long he’s been playing this season.

    If I were Theo and Jed, I’d definitely pursue this guy. In my estimation, he’d be a solid #3 SP with the ceiling of a #2. His floor would be a #4 because he definitely needs to work on getting LH’s out. What kind of contract should the Cubs offer him? I’d compare his abilities to a lighter version of Anibal Sanchez who just received about $16 mil/year. I think an offer of 5 or 6 years at $9 mil/year could equate to great value.

    • Mick

      I REALLY think the Cubs need to get into serious contention for this guy, pitchers like this don’t just grow on trees. There’s a lot of risk because he hasn’t faced top-tier competition but there’s also a huge reward if he pitches well. I think the Cubs should get crazy creative in order to trump all other offers dollars-wise. They could offer team options for years 4,5,6 with enormous buy-outs, they could add player options for the later years in the contract (similar to what Oakland did with Cespedes), they could offer bonuses for All-Star appearances, Wins, IP, etc. Here’s the list of potentially available 2014 Free Agent SP’s:

      Bronson Arroyo
      Scott Baker
      Erik Bedard
      Nick Blackburn *
      A.J. Burnett
      Chris Capuano *
      Chris Carpenter
      Bruce Chen
      Bartolo Colon
      Aaron Cook
      Jorge De La Rosa
      Scott Feldman
      Gavin Floyd
      Jeff Francis
      Armando Galarraga
      Jon Garland
      Matt Garza
      Roy Halladay *
      Jason Hammel
      Aaron Harang *
      Rich Harden
      Dan Haren
      Roberto Hernandez
      Tim Hudson
      Phil Hughes
      Ubaldo Jimenez *
      Josh Johnson
      Jeff Karstens
      Hiroki Kuroda
      John Lannan
      Jon Lester *
      Colby Lewis
      Ted Lilly
      Tim Lincecum
      Derek Lowe
      Paul Maholm
      Shaun Marcum
      Jason Marquis
      Daisuke Matsuzaka
      Brett Myers *
      Ricky Nolasco
      Mike Pelfrey
      Andy Pettitte
      Wandy Rodriguez *
      Jonathan Sanchez
      Ervin Santana
      Johan Santana *
      Joe Saunders *
      James Shields *
      Tim Stauffer
      Jason Vargas
      Ryan Vogelsong *
      Edinson Volquez
      Tsuyoshi Wada *
      Chien-Ming Wang
      Chris Young
      Barry Zito

      That’s freaking gross list. Wouldn’t you rather have a 26-year old version of Anibal Sanchez that can throw strikes? SIGN HIM!

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

      Good report.

      But the creativity thing, while good, isn’t that what other teams would equally do?

      I am sure his advisers are looking for their comparable pitcher just like you did, and know that contract. At 26, reaching his athletic peak, he is gonna want a 5 year plus deal, options after that. Given your compare to Sanchez, I bet he wants someone to pony up $12-18 million per year to get him.

      3/42 to 6/84 ranges with all kinds of options, and bonuses you alluded to.

      • Mick

        The best comparable situation to MAG’s would probably be Hyun-jin Ryu. He signed last year, at age 26, to a 6-year $36 million deal. Ryu’s coming from a better league but has less dominant stuff.

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

          Good thoughts. Do you think this guy comes here for Hyun-jin Ryu money?
          Once someone throws $50million in reports, I doubt he’ll come for less than 10 mil. But who knows? I just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express.

    • SenorGato

      Thanks for the video. I would say he passes the eye test.

    • Cheese Chad

      Is that what a Cuban montage is suppose to look like? Pitch (as batter backs out), cue the radar gun and simultaneous spanish mamba music. And repeat.

    • JBarnes

      ” He mixes his fastballs really well, it looks like he uses both a 4 and 2-seamer. The 4-seamer looks to come in on a RH batter and sits between 91-94 mph (he hit 96 once) and the 2-seamer tails away from a RH batter and sits between 87-89 mph. He’s also got a slider he throws in the low-80′s and a slower curve he throws around 75. These seem to be his off-speed stuff because I didn’t see any change-ups.”

      I think the pitch you’re seeing run away from the righties is a cutter/slider and the “curveball” is actually a change up. Guy has nice pitches and good size although he has a funky first step in his delivery…not that it seems to matter too much.

  • JB88

    Just a thought, but if the Cubs were able to add Gonzalez for just money, then isn’t it also possible that what they need in a return for Garcia may also change? In other words, if the Cubs add a Gonzalez who they view as an almost-ready-ML piece, then they may be willing to add position players over pitching prospects in the Garcia trade.

    Just a thought as to how the Cubs may be internally viewing these two transactions and how they might not be as disparate as we might imagine.

    • On The Farm

      This FO is smart enough to know that while pitching is very thin, you take the best available talent (They passed on Gray for a bat didn’t they?). I think the Cubs are looking for the best package for Garza.

      Also its worth nothing that Gonzalez is not a given, so he doesn’t automatically change the thinking. Nor does adding just one arm fix a system drought.

      • Mr. B. Patient

        YES. This^.

      • Patrick G

        Is Gonzalez really worth 50-60 mil? I don’t know much about what kind of pitcher he is but that seems fairly a big risk for an international player. He definitely could be a Darvish type but they always seem to scare me

  • jj

    Maybe Rosenthal and Gammons are both right – the Dodgers have minimal interest, which is why they will offer only 5/50.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      Ha. Yeah, maybe.

  • James

    Tommy your probley right about the my post. I still would be in on a deal with Matt Davidson and a prospect for Garza.

  • Jon

    Thoyer’s recent history with Cuba hasn’t been so great, I think and hope Soler will work out, but they should have got Cespedes and Puig and Conception was a total bust. Hopefully they don’t overrpay.

    • josh

      Cuban players are a crapshoot

    • gocatsgo2003

      Remember when Puig has yet to demonstrate any kind of sustained success in the Bigs (.179/.223/.179 in the last two weeks or 30 PAs)? Dude obviously has some tremendous physical skills, but MLB pitchers are also starting to “build the book” on him.

      • Jon

        Fun with arbitrary endpoints

        • gocatsgo2003

          Arbitrary perhaps… but that’s also just what Baseball Reference calculates for me. I’m too lazy to go through and do it myself.

      • Mick

        Why are we even comparing MAG to Puig? Here’s the list of players who defected from Cuba:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_baseball_players_who_defected_from_Cuba

        I’d say the list of pitchers is very impressive.

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

          I’d say we place too much emphasis on where a player comes from instead of what the player can do for the Cubs.

          The Cubs can bid, I just hope the deal, if landed, will garner great results and the PR helps to establish the club as a bastion for players of all shades and origins. And the gate follows to improve the finances to do more.

  • taits06

    Part of me does wonder, however, if not just this FO, but other team’s FO might be waiting to see where Gonzalez signs before dealing for Garza. I mean, If the dodgers get this deal done, they’re likely out of the Garza sweepstakes, but the D’backs might re-surface in trade talks. I’m not saying for certain that this is that case, but that it is possible. Just for curiousity’s sake, does anyone know who else might be involved with Gonzalez?

  • Cheryl

    Its getting closer to the trade deadline. If the cubs are looking for good pitching why not just stay with Garza and make a good pitch for the Cuban? They might not get what Garza’s worth at this point and several teams may be shying away from a rental – the Rockies are probably not alone there. The signing of the Cuban may be worth a seven year offer.

    • Cheese Chad

      Because the Cubs aren’t going to contend this year so you don’t want to let him leave and get nothing. They also probably have a pretty good idea of what he’s worth on the market and they don’t agree with it. Moreover, they don’t think he’ll be this good in two years when they expect to be competitive. A lot of it is time frame and they want a lot of their guys to peak at the same time.

  • JoeyCollins

    Remember when Puig was up for signing and the Cubs were considered a front runner, and the Dodgers weren’t even in the race. If I remember right they barely scouted the guy, if at all, and just decided to outspend everyone and make a splash as new owners. The Dodgers might not be too crazy about him, but I can still see them throwing 50 mil his way just because they can.

    • On The Farm

      I listened to Colin Cowherd last month and he was on with the Dodger’s guy who is given the credit of scouting Puig. He said that the interest in Puig was pretty minimal at the time, but once the Cubs got involved and the owner/FO/whoever came to him and asked if he would really be worth the money (whatever his contract ended up being) and he told them absolutley.

  • Patrick G

    Just heard on NY station that people think they could get Costellanos for Parnell. Atleast Cubs fans aren’t the only ones with crazy expectations

  • todd mccombs

    Garza is not going to resign with the Cubs unless they over pay him – on the open market he gets 5 year between 15 and 18 mil a year. (He will never give a home town discount) I am guessing 16 to 17 range which is way high.

    keeping him and getting a draft pick in the 40 to 50 range (If we get one – would be a player not as good as any one of the three players Texas offered) probably not such a great idea. If he makes this start and gets hurt Cubs could get nothing for a Garza at all.

    Trading Garza before tonight’s start then using the money savings to sign the Gonzalez 5 years 55 – 60 mil. Would be an option i would like to see happen.

  • CubsFaninMS

    Is Garza a weak #1/#2 or is Garza a solid #2/very solid #3?

    Dead horse = beaten

    Can we just rank Garza on a scale of 1-10? One being Chris Volstad and ten being Clayton Kershaw? I say he’s an 8.

  • Pingback: Dodgers Reportedly No Longer Interested in Miguel Alfredo Gonzalez | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary()

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+