The Orioles offered Schoop and Rodriguez for Garza? (Update: No they didn't)

[Mayor McCheese]

I've said it before (was similary pilloried) and will now say it again, but I agree with Roy.

Could we upgrade our staff? Yes, but there are two huge considerations when projecting October. First, do we think a staff of Tillman, Hammel, Feldman, Gonzalez and Chen, with Britton/Gausman as backups, is really the quality of the #25 staff in baseball? I don't believe that. Not for a second. I think people who are saying our starting pitching WILL BE #25 because it HAS BEEN #25 so far are just wrong. That's a pretty good rotation, IMO probably in the 10-15 range. That brings me to the second consideration:

What would it cost to upgrade our rotation? If Britton and Schoop gets me a stud (meaning better than Garza), I do it. Heck, I probably do Britton and Matusz for Garza and assume that Patton, McFarland and Wada can handle lefties out of the pen.

I am not completely disagreeing with you because the pitching SHOULD be better but in reality it is what it is right now....it just hasnt been good but with our talent theres always a bright light at the end of the tunnel...

lets see how they handle a series with TEX and TOR

[Mayor McCheese]

My guess is that Theo asked for 1) Garza, 2) Bundy, 3) Schoop and EdRod

Why not ask for the moon so much before the deadline? We'll see what Theo ends up with. Not sure he will end up with more than he gave up, but it only takes one buyer.

Maybe we are lucky that Schoop has been hurt. I don't think our system is deep enough to deal multiple top five or so organizational prospects for a rental.

This. A team will panic. Theo will get it done.

[atomic]

Garza isn't a TOR starter. Not even close. He's near a 4.00 career ERA guy who has pitched in the NL as of late. He was injured last year. He was injured this year. He has a few months left on his contract and is making $10.25 million this year. Look to the deal that Miami got for Nolasco. That's more in line with what Garza is worth. Matusz isn't a free agent until 2017, making $1.6 million this year and some people think he can still start..especially in the NL. As for Avery, if not him then you go with a Hoes type of guy.

Either way, Garza is not in any way, shape, or form worth an Erod/Schoop package. That's just insane.

Your comparison is comical. Nolesco has a half a run ERA higher pitching his career in the NL whil Garza has pitched most of his career in the AL and even had success in the AL East. If you come up with some pathetic trade offering of Matusz and Avery you aren't going to get a top pitcher. It is arguable that Arrieta and Strop and the international money is better value. If you could just give up non prospects and left handed specialists to get top starters every team in the league would be making that deal..

BTW Garza's NL ERA is 3.5 and Nolesco's is 4.44. I am guessing the Marlins didn't have a bunch of people banging their door down to pay for Nolesco's 11.5 million dollar salary. The Dodgers were probably the only one stupid enough to trade for him.

[Crazysilver03]

Your comparison is comical. Nolesco has a half a run ERA higher pitching his career in the NL whil Garza has pitched most of his career in the AL and even had success in the AL East. If you come up with some pathetic trade offering of Matusz and Avery you aren't going to get a top pitcher. It is arguable that Arrieta and Strop and the international money is better value. If you could just give up non prospects and left handed specialists to get top starters every team in the league would be making that deal..

BTW Garza's NL ERA is 3.5 and Nolesco's is 4.44. I am guessing the Marlins didn't have a bunch of people banging their door down to pay for Nolesco's 11.5 million dollar salary. The Dodgers were probably the only one stupid enough to trade for him.

The Dodgers offered to take on his contract so they could give up lesser prospects. None of the players the Marlins acquired will likely amount to more than bullpen arms.

[Three Run Homer]

There may be some team willing to give up two of their top ten prospects to get Matt Garza for a half season. If Theo can make that trade, more power to him. But I sure as hell don't want the Orioles to trade two real prospects for a half a season of a number 3 starter.

[LayzieDES]

Report now saying Cubs may keep Garza.

http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2013/7/8/4504484/matt-garza-rumors-chicago-cubs

It wouldn't make much sense for them to keep him. They need to restock their system & have a ton of holes to fill.

[LookitsPuck]

Your comparison is comical. Nolesco has a half a run ERA higher pitching his career in the NL whil Garza has pitched most of his career in the AL and even had success in the AL East. If you come up with some pathetic trade offering of Matusz and Avery you aren't going to get a top pitcher. It is arguable that Arrieta and Strop and the international money is better value. If you could just give up non prospects and left handed specialists to get top starters every team in the league would be making that deal..

Comical? Garza is not a top of the rotation starter. In what world is a pitcher who is hovering around ~107 ERA+ and a 1.315 WHIP in the AL with a near 4.00 ERA top of the rotation?

BTW Garza's NL ERA is 3.5 and Nolesco's is 4.44. I am guessing the Marlins didn't have a bunch of people banging their door down to pay for Nolesco's 11.5 million dollar salary. The Dodgers were probably the only one stupid enough to trade for him.

Nolasco has been healthy, Garza has not. They're making similar money. It's a very good comparison, and there's no way in hell you trade ERod and Schoop for Garza. I'm telling you, the haul that the Cubs are going to get for him is not going to be very impressive. I think a Matusz + Hoes can net a Garza. You're forgetting he's making over $10 million, he's been hurt 2 consecutive years in a row, and he's pitching in the NL.

What the Dodgers got for Nolasco was the rough equivalent of fodder with the upside of *maybe* being bullpen arms. *MAYBE*. The intriguing thing about Matusz is that he's controllable, cheap, left handed and could actually start. Hoes is an athletic player who is only 23 (just turned 23 in March) who has gotten better in every step he's taken over the last few years.

The point of the matter is that Garza isn't worth anything blue chip.

[Rene88]

We need one of the arms out of the White Sox pen, YUM!

[atomic]

Report now saying Cubs may keep Garza.

http://www.sbnation.com/mlb/2013/7/8/4504484/matt-garza-rumors-chicago-cubs

It wouldn't make much sense for them to keep him. They need to restock their system & have a ton of holes to fill.

Well if they don't get solid prospects there is no reason to trade him. You can sign him or you can offer him the 13 million and get the pick if he turns it down.

[atomic]

Comical? Garza is not a top of the rotation starter. In what world is a pitcher who is hovering around ~107 ERA+ and a 1.315 WHIP in the AL with a near 4.00 ERA top of the rotation?

Nolasco has been healthy, Garza has not. They're making similar money. It's a very good comparison, and there's no way in hell you trade ERod and Schoop for Garza. I'm telling you, the haul that the Cubs are going to get for him is not going to be very impressive. I think a Matusz + Hoes can net a Garza. You're forgetting he's making over $10 million, he's been hurt 2 consecutive years in a row, and he's pitching in the NL.

What the Dodgers got for Nolasco was the rough equivalent of fodder with the upside of *maybe* being bullpen arms. *MAYBE*. The intriguing thing about Matusz is that he's controllable, cheap, left handed and could actually start. Hoes is an athletic player who is only 23 (just turned 23 in March) who has gotten better in every step he's taken over the last few years.

The point of the matter is that Garza isn't worth anything blue chip.

You aren't going to get Garza for Matusz and Hoes. The Cubs will just let him go in free agency and get the draft pick compensation.

[weams]

I'm in the minority here but I would have made that deal hands down with no hesitation. You still have a one year option on Rza. Who knows what the future holds for Schoop or Rodriquez for that matter. The playoffs and WS are very much up for grabs and adding Rza, a battle tested AL East pitcher, would really elevate our game. Just my two cents. Happy Monday all!!:thumbsup1:

What, we turned down this guy?

[weams]

The difference between Garza and Feldman is not worth ERod and Schoop. Anybody pining over the loss of Arrieta and Strop? Our pitching needs to be better, but who do you get rid of to make room for that TOR guy? And Garza is no better than Chen IMO, neither are TOR's.

Pedro has been ROCK solid!

[weams]

What, we turned down this guy?

Or was it this dude. I am now confused.

[Frobby]

Comical? Garza is not a top of the rotation starter. In what world is a pitcher who is hovering around ~107 ERA+ and a 1.315 WHIP in the AL with a near 4.00 ERA top of the rotation?

Nolasco has been healthy, Garza has not. They're making similar money. It's a very good comparison, and there's no way in hell you trade ERod and Schoop for Garza. I'm telling you, the haul that the Cubs are going to get for him is not going to be very impressive. I think a Matusz + Hoes can net a Garza. You're forgetting he's making over $10 million, he's been hurt 2 consecutive years in a row, and he's pitching in the NL.

What the Dodgers got for Nolasco was the rough equivalent of fodder with the upside of *maybe* being bullpen arms. *MAYBE*. The intriguing thing about Matusz is that he's controllable, cheap, left handed and could actually start. Hoes is an athletic player who is only 23 (just turned 23 in March) who has gotten better in every step he's taken over the last few years.

The point of the matter is that Garza isn't worth anything blue chip.

We are getting caught up in semantics, as usual. Regardless of how you want to define "top of the rotation," Garza has been well above average in his career. He's been worth 16.4 fWAR since 2006, 48th among starting pitchers, which arguably puts him right in the middle of the no. 2 starters in baseball. In ERA, he ranks 28th among 77 starting pitchers with at least 900 innings since 2006. If Garza is healthy now, there's every reason to think he'd be an above average starting pitcher in the AL.

How you view Nolasco compared to Garza depends on how much you like stats such as FIP and xFIP. Those stats like Nolasco (3.81 FIP, 3.77 xFIP since 2006)better than Garza (4.00, 4.04); traditional ERA favors Garza by a lot, 3.82 to 4.44. Honestly, I haven't seen Nolasco enough to have an opinion of him. I have seen plenty of Garza, and think he's a pretty good pitcher.

For me, the biggest problem with Garza is he's a free agent at the end of the year, and I'm not trading two good prospects for a guy who will start 15 games for us and then hit the bricks. I'd rather have done what we did, and traded two guys who have used up their options for Feldman, who isn't as good as Garza but still upgrades our staff significantly.

[weams]

Garza has had four arbitrations avoided. He does not have an option for next season. He does not bring back a pick. He is an absolute rental. And in a trade, the ability to sign the player to an extension has zero impact. Zero. If anyone would have fallen in love with a situation, it would have been Elimination Joe. And he held out for more money, and a better park to pitch in. So no. Anyone who says, "I would trade for him and sign him to an extension," does not understand how it works this CBA.