Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)

Peter Gammons

  • RAMBLE
  • Franchise Player
  • 1742 posts this site

Posted: 2/1/2013 2:41 PM

Peter Gammons 


Heard Gammons on MLB Network today.

He said Cubs excited as Garza will throw from a mound next week in Arizona. And they are considering KEEPING HIM long term. Because they think with him, Jackson and Samardzija, Cubs could have a pretty good rotation a year or two or three from now when high ceiling prospects could arrive. Guys like Baez, Soler and Almora. Plus you also must factor in Castro and Rizzo.

Gammons thought the Cubs are starting to think they are getting closer than they used to believe.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/1/2013 3:46 PM

RE: Peter Gammons 


Unless another team is willing to drastically overpay in prospects, I don't see the urgency to move Garza. I didn't realize he was about the same age as Shark and Jackson. That trio doesn't overwhelm anyone, but it's pretty solid and should be for the next 4-5 years at least. If just 1 or 2 of Vizcaino/Maples/Johnson/McNutt/etc turn into something and the Cubs can add a legitimate ace like Price, they'll have one of the best rotations in the NL.
Reply | Quote
  • papa46
  • MVP
  • 751 posts this site

Posted: 2/2/2013 7:54 AM

Re: Peter Gammons 


I think the Cubs routinely put out a bunch of B.S to reporters as a standard operating procedure.  I think its an attempt to try to keep as much leverage as possible.  I would be surprised if Garza is not traded and I would be surprised if they do not take a pitcher with the number 2 pick.  Recent stories have the Cubs keeping Garza and drafting a hitter with no 2 overall.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/2/2013 10:33 AM

Re: Peter Gammons 


Yeah I tend to agree.  Either this is just speculation on Gammons' part (especially the last point, it sounds like he's projecting his own opinion about how far away the Cubs are) or they fed him misleading info.  No way would this tight-lipped front office give away their intentions so that it could be relayed on the MLB network.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/2/2013 11:04 AM

RE: Peter Gammons 



Anomalied wrote: Unless another team is willing to drastically overpay in prospects, I don't see the urgency to move Garza. I didn't realize he was about the same age as Shark and Jackson. That trio doesn't overwhelm anyone, but it's pretty solid and should be for the next 4-5 years at least. If just 1 or 2 of Vizcaino/Maples/Johnson/McNutt/etc turn into something and the Cubs can add a legitimate ace like Price, they'll have one of the best rotations in the NL.
Theo and Jed probably already know what Garza's asking price will be when he hits FA after this year.  Dude is going to get paid.  Teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, and others will enter the bidding.  If the Cubs aren't willing to pay, they have to trade him sooner than later. Either sign him or get a top tier prospect(s) in return. 

A 75 win season followed by losing him for nothing more than a compensation pick would be a waste.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/2/2013 11:57 AM

RE: Peter Gammons 



doughboy981 wrote:
Anomalied wrote: Unless another team is willing to drastically overpay in prospects, I don't see the urgency to move Garza. I didn't realize he was about the same age as Shark and Jackson. That trio doesn't overwhelm anyone, but it's pretty solid and should be for the next 4-5 years at least. If just 1 or 2 of Vizcaino/Maples/Johnson/McNutt/etc turn into something and the Cubs can add a legitimate ace like Price, they'll have one of the best rotations in the NL.
Theo and Jed probably already know what Garza's asking price will be when he hits FA after this year.  Dude is going to get paid.  Teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, and others will enter the bidding.  If the Cubs aren't willing to pay, they have to trade him sooner than later. Either sign him or get a top tier prospect(s) in return. 

A 75 win season followed by losing him for nothing more than a compensation pick would be a waste.
I think if the right deal doesn't coming along during ST and Garza ends up regaining his form, the Cubs can work out an extension during the season.  Garza seems like he's always liked playing here, at least from my impressions of him.  And I think he's bought into Theo and Jed's vision of building a model for sustained success.

Epstein has experience battling with AL East GMs and rich, generous owners.   But he also knows he has the upper hand because of how much more time the Cubs can negotiate with Garza before the other sharks can swarm on him.

But again if Garza shows up next month and looks 100% and a team is willing to severely overpay (with say an Olt/Martin/Perez or Porcello/Smyly/Castellanos package) you have to pull the trigger on that.

Last edited 2/2/2013 12:02 PM by Anomalied

Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/2/2013 5:55 PM

Re: Peter Gammons 


Unlike most, I find Gammons an entertaining guy. And the reason I find him entertaining is because I know that is what he is being payed to do. Anybody relying on Gammons for accurate insider information must not have been following him, at all, nationally over the last two decades.

Does Garza stay or go? Why not have 2007 throw a dart at the wall? It'll have no less validity.

Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/3/2013 7:14 AM

RE: Peter Gammons 


The song "Dreamweaver" comes to mind...The Cubs have to start pumping up the value on Garza... a pitcher that has pitched 200 innings twicein his career.
Reply | Quote
  • papa46
  • MVP
  • 751 posts this site

Posted: 2/3/2013 8:21 AM

RE: Peter Gammons 


I remember when folks talked about Mike Mussina and his lack of 20 win seasons.  Now he won 18 or more games 5 times, 17 a couple etc.  

Garza has only pitched 200 inning twice in his career is true.  However, in his five complete seasons he also pitched 198 and 184 innings.  In 4 of his 5 full seasons he made 30 starts.  

Pretty durable numbers.
Reply | Quote
  • RAMBLE
  • Franchise Player
  • 1742 posts this site

Posted: 2/3/2013 12:49 PM

Re: Peter Gammons 


I took what Gammons was saying was that the Cubs are thinking about keeping him. Because we do have high potential guys in the pipeline, but when they get here we may not have enough pitching.

Gammons thought was the Cubs weren't sure what to do yet.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 2/4/2013 8:57 AM

Re: Peter Gammons 



RAMBLE wrote: I took what Gammons was saying was that the Cubs are thinking about keeping him. Because we do have high potential guys in the pipeline, but when they get here we may not have enough pitching.

Gammons thought was the Cubs weren't sure what to do yet.
The Cubs talked extension with Garza before last season began. Garza wanted the no trade included at which point talks stopped. The Cubs then had a trade almost completed with TX but Garza had an injury that prevented the trade from being completed.

If Garza is willing to waive the no trade clause then they can talk extension if he insists on having a no trade clause he will be traded when he proves he is healthy.
Reply | Quote