2013 Trade Deadline Thread
Collapse
Recommended Videos
Collapse
X
-
I just feel that we could get better value for Garza than an almost 25 year old third baseman who's just going to keep the spot warm for Bryant. It's not like we're going to contend this year, and quite possibly next year too. I'll take my chances with the younger prospects.
I'd think we would be asking for pitching prospects back. Olt's a good player and all, but I just don't like him being a centerpiece in the deal.
If the Rangers want to give up a 3B prospect, I'd be cool with getting Joey Gallo. But, that's not going to happen. LolComment
-
Re: 2013 Trade Deadline Thread
We just drafted Kris Bryant. I know that he's not nearly ready for the bigs, but he's the long term answer that we've been looking for at 3rd.
I just feel that we could get better value for Garza than an almost 25 year old third baseman who's just going to keep the spot warm for Bryant. It's not like we're going to contend this year, and quite possibly next year too. I'll take my chances with the younger prospects.
I'd think we would be asking for pitching prospects back. Olt's a good player and all, but I just don't like him being a centerpiece in the deal.
If the Rangers want to give up a 3B prospect, I'd be cool with getting Joey Gallo. But, that's not going to happen. Lol
Yeah, nobody from that Hickory lineup is going anywhere haha. I'd be fine if the Rangers gave up Olt and Luke Jackson or CJ Edwards and Luis Sardinas. The Cubs likely won't get a huge haul, since Garza will likely be a rental, and Texas has other options, such as Bud Norris. But having Garza as a 3 in a Darvish/Holland/Garza/Lewis playoff rotation would be nasty.Comment
-
Re: 2013 Trade Deadline Thread
You can't think that far ahead. Best case scenario you have a logjam, a good problem. I don't get why people are scared of having depth lol. It's a good thing. Worst comes to worst you trade someone, but who's to say Bryant/Vitters/Olt won't bust?"Twelve at-bats is a pretty decent sample size." - Eric ByrnesComment
-
@ChrisCotillo: So a Garza for Luke Jackson, CJ Edwards and Mike Olt deal is possible. Not done, but they're the names in play. #Cubs #Rangers
How is garza NOT going to bring in a big haul? Theo and Jed aren't giving this guy away, rental or not. He's hands down the best arm available and his recent 5-8 starts/numbers before the break speak for themselves.Go Cubs Go [ W ]Comment
-
Re: 2013 Trade Deadline Thread
@ChrisCotillo: So a Garza for Luke Jackson, CJ Edwards and Mike Olt deal is possible. Not done, but they're the names in play. #Cubs #Rangers
How is garza NOT going to bring in a big haul? Theo and Jed aren't giving this guy away, rental or not. He's hands down the best arm available and his recent 5-8 starts/numbers before the break speak for themselves.Comment
-
Re: 2013 Trade Deadline Thread
I realize it's not done, but if this were to happen, I'd like this deal for the Cubbies. Nice haul for a rental."Twelve at-bats is a pretty decent sample size." - Eric ByrnesComment
-
Comment
-
Yeah, I meant as far as trading, the Rangers won't even dare giving up any of the Hickory guys for Garza. I'm really high on Williams too, but I have some high hopes for Brinson.Comment
-
Revisiting what I said about Olt last night:
I was under the impression that Olt was either the only or the only significant piece that Texas was offering. I knew that we had asked about Perez, and the Rangers said no way. (can't say that I blame them)
Now, I'd be fine with an Olt + Jackson + Edwards deal.
I overreacted when I said that I really don't want Olt, it was stupid. But, that package above is very solid for Garza. And I'd be impressed if we pulled it off. I did say that I felt that we should address the pitching depth, and that does.
Now, the reports today are that a deal is very close. With what happened last year with all of the Cubs rumors, especially with Dempster, nothing will surprise me, and I'm not getting my hopes up for practically anything.
Bruce Levine of ESPN Chicago said that we'd asked the Indians for Lonnie Chisenhall in a Garza deal. Since it sounds like we're adamant on getting a third baseman back, I'm fine with Mike Olt.
And what AC said a few posts back is right, you can't think too far ahead. Olt can come in and play 3B for us every day right now. Logjam down the road isn't a problem. I mean, look what the Rangers are doing with their logjam at third right now, acquiring a pitcher like Garza.Comment
-
Revisiting what I said about Olt last night:
I was under the impression that Olt was either the only or the only significant piece that Texas was offering. I knew that we had asked about Perez, and the Rangers said no way. (can't say that I blame them)
Now, I'd be fine with an Olt + Jackson + Edwards deal.
I overreacted when I said that I really don't want Olt, it was stupid. But, that package above is very solid for Garza. And I'd be impressed if we pulled it off. I did say that I felt that we should address the pitching depth, and that does.
Now, the reports today are that a deal is very close. With what happened last year with all of the Cubs rumors, especially with Dempster, nothing will surprise me, and I'm not getting my hopes up for practically anything.
Bruce Levine of ESPN Chicago said that we'd asked the Indians for Lonnie Chisenhall in a Garza deal. Since it sounds like we're adamant on getting a third baseman back, I'm fine with Mike Olt.
And what AC said a few posts back is right, you can't think too far ahead. Olt can come in and play 3B for us every day right now. Logjam down the road isn't a problem. I mean, look what the Rangers are doing with their logjam at third right now, acquiring a pitcher like Garza.
Hate to see Garza go but hope what we get in return pans out. I like olt. A lot.Go Cubs Go [ W ]Comment
-
Re: 2013 Trade Deadline Thread
I'm starting to think now that this Rangers/Cubs deal won't happen. If they were as close as everyone wanted it to seem, Neil Ramirez wouldn't be starting tonight for Frisco. It wouldn't surprise me if most of the rumors were put out by the Cubs organization to try to get other teams to upgrade their packages, because the Rangers have been notoriously tight lipped when it comes to trades.Comment
-
Re: 2013 Trade Deadline Thread
I'm starting to think now that this Rangers/Cubs deal won't happen. If they were as close as everyone wanted it to seem, Neil Ramirez wouldn't be starting tonight for Frisco. It wouldn't surprise me if most of the rumors were put out by the Cubs organization to try to get other teams to upgrade their packages, because the Rangers have been notoriously tight lipped when it comes to trades.
Originally posted by @JeffPassanSources: Cubs-Rangers deal for Garza hits snag, no longer a certainty. While teams still negotiating, Chicago seeking alternatives to Texas.Comment
-
Re: 2013 Trade Deadline Thread
Here we go again, Cubs fans......Dempster and Marmol all over again. I blame the media. You can't blame the execs for agreeing in principle contingent on medicals and changing their minds when they get to that point. All this "basically 99% done" and "will happen tonight" and "Garza's thrown his last pitch as a Cub" is all HYPE. These twitter/blogger/webjournalists/newspapermen have ZERO credibility and no ethics regarding accountability in what they report. There aren't any consequences for what amounts to little more than rumor mongering. It's totally disgusting journalism--almost makes me wonder why I get suckered into following developments before things actually happen over, and over, and over again.Chicago Cubs | Chicago Bulls | Green Bay Packers | Michigan WolverinesComment
Comment