Jump to content





Bleacher Nation is on Facebook, and you should totally "Like" us:
 


Bleacher Nation is also on Twitter, and you should totally follow us:




Upcoming Calendar Events

There are no forthcoming calendar events

Today's birthdays

No members are celebrating a birthday today

Photo

Garza is not worth that much


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#16 SlamminSammy

SlamminSammy

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 02:19 PM

It's changed in more ways that could hurt his value too. Teams cant over spend on the draft or IFA to restock the farm so prospects are arguably much more valuable, I think Soler and Puig proved that. I agree that Garza is the most valuable commodity on the market now, but I completely disagree he is worth more than Greinke, Jimenez, Latos or gio. Keep in mind Latos and Gio were both signed after the CBA and I pointed out above why they were much more valuable than Garza.

All of those guys had the promise of the compensatory draft picks as well so that is a wash. There is an argument to be made for the extra wildcard but the wildcard is also pretty diluted with the one game playoff so maybe more teams are willing to take it slower. I think all of it could easily be offset with the increased value of prospects because of CBA limits.

The point is we dont know how the market has changed yet until some deals are made. If, for example Greinke makes a killing for the brewers, then I think I would adjust my valuation of Garza, but that hasnt happened yet. The report that the cubs were looking for a Gio Gonzalez type deal and didnt get it I think helps prove my point. Garza didnt have as much value as Gio and other GMs knew it. I see no logical reason he has more value than he did then so I have no reason to believe he will net that kind of package.

I really do hope I'm wrong if the Cubs trade Garza, but I would also be content if I was correct and the cubs made a straight up deal of Garza for Turner because I think that is a good deal for the cubs. Its not a steal, but good trades rarely are. I also think it would be nice to extend Garza because I think hed be a good piece of the rotation for several years to come.

#17 ncsujuri

ncsujuri

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 99 posts
  • Facebook:ncsujuri
  • LocationVirginia Beach, VA

Posted 16 July 2012 - 02:28 PM

A market has been created over the past few years. TOR pitchers are fetching big packages. Look at the Greinke, Latos, Gio, Ubaldo and Garza deals.

Latos and Gio had i believe 3-4 cost controlled years left when they were traded so they arent comparable. I already said why Ubaldo wasnt Comparable. Greinke had two full years of control and had won a freaking Cy Young. I like Garza, but he doesnt compare to what Greinke was when he was traded.


He also doesn't have the history that Greinke has when it comes to personality disorder, there are factors that you are ignoring simply to make your argument better. How about the fact that there are going to be multiple teams who are in contention for the play-offs bidding against one another and thusly inflating Garza's value compared to when the Cubs acquired him? Or is that impossible simply because the team that hypothetically acquires him has less control years?

 - It's a great day for a ballgame, LET'S PLAY TWO!


#18 Cubs Dude

Cubs Dude

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 54 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 02:33 PM

Listen Slammin Sammy, I am with you that Garza probably won't get us as much as we hope. But if all we get is Turner straight up for him, that would be very dissapointing. Turner has fallen off big time. We will not get a Gio Gonzalez return, but still should get more than Turner. Other teams still will receive a sandwich pick if he leaves in 2 years. Garza is no ace, but he is playoff battle tested in the AL. None of the other guys you mentioned have that going for them.

#19 Crockett

Crockett

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 243 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 02:37 PM

Which report are you referring to as far as the Cubs demands? I've not seen that.

I disagree with what you mean about prospects. Just as many draft picks signed this year. I don't think the reality of the new IFA rules will show for a while, and therefore prospects aren't worth less immediately.

#20 Tommy

Tommy

    Bleacher Hero

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 696 posts
  • LocationPekin, IL

Posted 16 July 2012 - 03:45 PM

It's changed in more ways that could hurt his value too. Teams cant over spend on the draft or IFA to restock the farm so prospects are arguably much more valuable, I think Soler and Puig proved that. I agree that Garza is the most valuable commodity on the market now, but I completely disagree he is worth more than Greinke, Jimenez, Latos or gio. Keep in mind Latos and Gio were both signed after the CBA and I pointed out above why they were much more valuable than Garza.

All of those guys had the promise of the compensatory draft picks as well so that is a wash. There is an argument to be made for the extra wildcard but the wildcard is also pretty diluted with the one game playoff so maybe more teams are willing to take it slower. I think all of it could easily be offset with the increased value of prospects because of CBA limits.

The point is we dont know how the market has changed yet until some deals are made. If, for example Greinke makes a killing for the brewers, then I think I would adjust my valuation of Garza, but that hasnt happened yet. The report that the cubs were looking for a Gio Gonzalez type deal and didnt get it I think helps prove my point. Garza didnt have as much value as Gio and other GMs knew it. I see no logical reason he has more value than he did then so I have no reason to believe he will net that kind of package.

I really do hope I'm wrong if the Cubs trade Garza, but I would also be content if I was correct and the cubs made a straight up deal of Garza for Turner because I think that is a good deal for the cubs. Its not a steal, but good trades rarely are. I also think it would be nice to extend Garza because I think hed be a good piece of the rotation for several years to come.

Why would the Cubs trade a 28 year old proven TOR guy for an unproven prospect straight up? That would be a terrible trade.
- diehard fanclub member #002

#21 SlamminSammy

SlamminSammy

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 51 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 04:20 PM

Which report are you referring to as far as the Cubs demands? I've not seen that.

I disagree with what you mean about prospects. Just as many draft picks signed this year. I don't think the reality of the new IFA rules will show for a while, and therefore prospects aren't worth less immediately.



It's on mlbtraderumors that they were looking for a Gio Gonzalez type deal in the offseason.

Just because just as many draft picks signed doesnt mean they are the same quality. There were no Dillon Maples's and Vogelbachs that could be had in the late rounds. Appel is a precautionary tale that drafting quality talent is a risky business and if you have it you dont want to get rid of it.

I misspoke when i said Garza for turner would be good. Garza for a top 20 in baseball prospect pitcher plus a lower level prospect with a decent shot at being a 2/3 pitcher but with some issues would be good. Thats what I think will be what the Cubs can get for him but I very clearly could be wrong since there are many issues that none of us can predict and there is no solid evidence to predict.

I only use factors that are based on empirical evidence that isn't speculative which is what all of the market factors are right now. If I'm right I'll probably say I told you so, and if I'm wrong I'm sure someone will say they told me so if they care i guess haha. Then again, maybe no trade happens and were all left wondering what if.

I think everyone is underestimating how much other teams value long term success simply because of the advent of a second wild card.

#22 Tommy

Tommy

    Bleacher Hero

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 696 posts
  • LocationPekin, IL

Posted 16 July 2012 - 05:55 PM


Which report are you referring to as far as the Cubs demands? I've not seen that.

I disagree with what you mean about prospects. Just as many draft picks signed this year. I don't think the reality of the new IFA rules will show for a while, and therefore prospects aren't worth less immediately.



It's on mlbtraderumors that they were looking for a Gio Gonzalez type deal in the offseason.

Just because just as many draft picks signed doesnt mean they are the same quality. There were no Dillon Maples's and Vogelbachs that could be had in the late rounds. Appel is a precautionary tale that drafting quality talent is a risky business and if you have it you dont want to get rid of it.

I misspoke when i said Garza for turner would be good. Garza for a top 20 in baseball prospect pitcher plus a lower level prospect with a decent shot at being a 2/3 pitcher but with some issues would be good. Thats what I think will be what the Cubs can get for him but I very clearly could be wrong since there are many issues that none of us can predict and there is no solid evidence to predict.

I only use factors that are based on empirical evidence that isn't speculative which is what all of the market factors are right now. If I'm right I'll probably say I told you so, and if I'm wrong I'm sure someone will say they told me so if they care i guess haha. Then again, maybe no trade happens and were all left wondering what if.

I think everyone is underestimating how much other teams value long term success simply because of the advent of a second wild card.

I think you might be right on that one, Sammy. I hope you're not, though!
- diehard fanclub member #002

#23 fromthemitten

fromthemitten

    sleeps in too late to answer the calendar trivia

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,471 posts
  • Twitter:fromthemitten
  • Locationin a van down by the river

Posted 17 July 2012 - 07:02 PM

Turner just got lit the fuck up today (six earned in two innings) so he's definitely no sure thing. I think Crockett has a great point that Garza's worth more not only because of the extra year but the compensatory draft picks that the other team would get for acquiring him at the deadline.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Bleacher Nation is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago National League Ballclub (that's the Cubs).