Even though the Cubs are more known for their failures, mistakes and screw-ups, every once in awhile you have to give them credit. We probably should do so more than we have, but the acquisition of Matt Garza is one we definitely have to view differently than we did at the time. That doesn’t necessarily mean it was a good deal. I’m not entirely sure if it was, but the Cubs saw something in Matt Garza and were confident they could make him a better pitcher than he had been. We constantly read about how Garza was an ace and even Jim Hendry said it. The Cubs thought they got one and we looked at the numbers and realized they more than likely got an overrated pitcher.
What we couldn’t consider is the information the Cubs scouting department had on Garza. The journalists are way too lazy to look into such things when they could write article after article about Alfonso Soriano being lazy. I think it’s clear by now that the scouts saw something as Garza has not only been a much better pitcher, but also an entirely different one. We know this because during Garza’s early struggles with regards to runs allowed (not strikeouts, walks and home runs), he complained that what they had him doing differently wasn’t working. He backtracked on those comments and said he’d continue to do what they have him doing. Why the Tampa Bay Rays, known for their player development, didn’t spot this is beyond me, but there’s no question that the Cubs saw a pitcher who would be much better than he had been.
As a result, it must change our opinion of the deal.
“Trade a player a year too early rather than a year too late.” – Branch Rickey
We can’t be sure what Rickey meant when he said this, but there is evidence to suggest that players perform worse after being traded. The obvious reason why this is true would be that teams know more about the player or players they’re trading than the team acquiring them does. In this case, it appears as though the Cubs knew a lot more about Garza than did the Rays.
Most of what the Rays acquired in return for Garza was basically a minor league roster filler. Robinson Chirinos is 27 already and he’s not had nearly as good a season in the minors this year as last. Sam Fuld‘s value is entirely defensive and we know how unreliable defensive metrics are from season to season. The Rays got a hot start from Fuld and have made the mistake of continuing to play him. He’s gotten nearly 250 plate appearances since April 24th and has a .577 OPS to show for it.
Brandon Guyer has put together another excellent season, this time at AAA, but he’s 25 years old and has only gotten a very breif call up to the big leagues. You can’t help but wonder why a 25 year old outfielder hitting so well is left in the minor leagues. It reminds me of Marquez Smith but obviously there was something the scouts and analysts did not like about him as he’s never gotten a chance. Smith. Smith, now 26 years old, has hit .282/.356/.476 in his minor league career (just under 2000 plate appearances). Guyer has hit .297/.361/.473 in 1855 plate appearances. He’s primarily been a corner outfielder, which is a less valuable defensive position than the 3rd base that Smith plays. Smith’s offense has been equal, but he plays a more valuable position. Both are old for their levels, have hit well, but never given a chance. There’s something there that we’re missing.
Chris Archer has remained at AA all season and has taken a big step. After joining the Cubs in the Mark DeRosa trade, Archer’s hits per 9 dropped to a little less than 6.5. This year it’s jumped back to 9.1. He allowed only 6 home runs in just over 250 innings in the Cubs organization. He’s allowed 11 in 134 this season. His walks per 9 fell below 5 with the Cubs and jumped to 5.4 this year. He struckout nearly 10 batters per 9 innings with the Cubs and is now striking out just 7.9 per 9. That’s lower than at any point in his career. Archer is still just 22, but he’s taken a big step back this year. Prior to joining the Cubs the scouting report on him was that he’d likely be a reliever. The Cubs turned him into someone who had the potential to be a top of the rotation and starter and from what I can tell, he’s back to being a reliever.
Hak-Ju Lee had a great season in High A after a somewhat disappointing 2010. He’s now in AA and has struggled in his first 50 or so plate appearances, which isn’t uncommon. Especially for someone his age. He’s easily the prize the Rays acquired in this trade and likely the only one who is going to provide much value to them in the future. When Sam Fuld becomes the second best player you acquired for someone like Matt Garza, I’m not exactly sure the Rays can call that trade a win.
The Cubs also acquired two other players in Fernando Perez who has been released and Zachary Rosscup who injured. Prior to his injury, Rosscup was putting together a very strong season.
I don’t know that the Cubs can call the the trade a win either, but as of right now, they come ahead in this. A lot can change if Lee develops as scouts think he can. If he does, the Rays win the trade easily, but if he doesn’t, there’s little chance they do. Considering the Cubs have Starlin Castro at SS, they didn’t really need Lee anyway. Based on what we know right now I’d just say that it was a decent trade. Both teams have a chance to be better as a result of it. That’s how most trades are designed.
Comments
[quote name=Aisle424]I’d prefer they try to dominate the league. At least until they get that first WS under their belt. I do think the psychology of being the team that EVERYONE knows will choke ends up being somewhat of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Those guys know what is at stake and they know they will be conquering heroes if they are the ones that succeed. That has to mess with one’s ability to focus enough to play the game at the highest level.
The more pure talent they have, the less likely an occasional flake-out will snowball into an inning like in Game 2 of 2008 when Zambrano had to get like 8 outs to get out of the damn inning.[/quote]I’d prefer they just build good teams and eventually build the best. It will take awhile for that, but I don’t think it’s at all out of the question that this team can contend even next year to be honest. It would require a lot of money and this team won’t do that, but we’re talking about the NL Central here. It’s a division the Pirates found themselves contenders in late July.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I’d prefer they just build good teams and eventually build the best. It will take awhile for that, but I don’t think it’s at all out of the question that this team can contend even next year to be honest. It would require a lot of money and this team won’t do that, but we’re talking about the NL Central here. It’s a division the Pirates found themselves contenders in late July.[/quote]
Maybe what they need to do is just try to sneak in via the NL Central’s inherent suckiness for a few years and that will give them the goodwill and revenue they will need to become the Yankees of the NL.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
[quote name=bubblesdachimp]Thoughts on Theo vs. Friedman?
I would prefer Theo personally. I feel like he does great with the draft and development AND is used to a big budget. It kinda freaks me out about bringing in a guy who has never had money how they would spend it. I would much rather trust someone who has been there and done that.[/quote]
I have the same concerns, but after looking into the last 5 drafts, it’s kind of remarkable how how good the Yankees farm system has been despite having 14 fewer draft picks in the first 3 rounds than the Red Sox. They had 16 fewer than the Rays. The Rays system was significantly better as it damn well should have been, but the Red Sox system was barely better. The MLB Draft is the largest part of amateur free agents, but it’s not the entire part. After looking into that, I’m not really sure if Theo is better than Cashman.
One other thing we’ve ignored recently is how good the MLB teams have been. Yeah, money matters, but the Yankees have proven they can have a good farm system and win a lot of games.
I’d still go with Friedman, but I think he’s actually overrated at this point. That’s not to say he isn’t good. He is, but he’s barely better than two other GMs in the same division. It’s also why the Rays are not going to win a WS in the next decade if not longer. Friedman, in all honesty, would be a dumbass to not leave Tampa Bay if given the opportunity.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]I’d prefer they just build good teams and eventually build the best. It will take awhile for that, but I don’t think it’s at all out of the question that this team can contend even next year to be honest. It would require a lot of money and this team won’t do that, but we’re talking about the NL Central here. It’s a division the Pirates found themselves contenders in late July.[/quote]
Right, but I think it is going to take a pretty fucking superior team to get through the playoffs.
Shit goes wrong for this team and I think they pretty much expect it. Crane sprinkling holy water was such a window into how much they really do think about the curse, whether they take it seriously or not. They think about it, and they half expect shit to go wrong so when it does, it’s “here we go again.” Other teams don’t have to deal with that. The Red Sox did and that was a pretty fucking great team that finally got over the hump.
Aisle424Quote Reply
Good post. I don’t like throwing my hands up “defensive metrics are unreliable” (even though that is correct); from my lying eyes, Fuld’s been quite the defender. I still woudl have had Guyer or Jennings up by May. Right now there’s no spot for Guyer because he’s not better than the starting OF (Jennings/Upton/Joyce).
Chris Archer was pitcher of the week last week, which is meaningless, but I’m at least glad to see him coming around a bit. Lee was obviously the prize.
Of course, this is evaluating the trade based on the talent exchanged. There were some other factors behind it; mostly Garza’s increasing paychecks and the ability to replace him with someone like Jeremy Hellickson (from the Rays POV).
Garza’s been awesome this year, but part of me wants to see another year out of him. I am glad to see people like Wreckard and HarryP confirming that his pitch selection has changed, as his declining peripherals and poor batted ball profile in Tampa were masked in terms of ERA and Wins due to the defense and park factors behind him.
MishQuote Reply
The 2008 team had the best chance of winning a World Series in my lifetime. They were good. Not just NL good. They were fucking good.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]The 2008 team had the best chance of winning a World Series in my lifetime. They were good. Not just NL good. They were fucking good.[/quote]
They really surprised me and were one of the few thrills I’ve had in 13 years of being a Cubs fan. It was such a sucker punch when they flamed out but that’s baseball…
Rice CubeQuote Reply
Game 2 was the worst…
bubblesdachimpQuote Reply
In 647 inning this Fuld has a Total Zone of 8. In over 300 innings prior to this season, he was league average. It’s entirely possible this season is more what his true talent is on defense, but for now I’ll assume he’s been worth 0 runs on defense. I just don’t care what the single season total is. I’ve tried to filter that out for over a year now unless I’m just looking for quick WAR numbers and am too lazy to subtract the defense.
If he somehow gets 3 more years of playing time (highly doubtful), I’ll look to see what he’s done and then adjust it at that point. Until then, he’s much closer to average than he is the 8 that he currently has. If anything, you have to regress the 8 UZR anyway as mgl has repeatedly said. So regress the 8 with 2+ seasons of league average and you get close to 0 anyway.
mb21Quote Reply
That’s a good point, but you still also want to at least come out even and it’s possible the Rays don’t even do that. It’s possible they come out ahead, but that really depends on Lee.
mb21Quote Reply
Joe Poz’s new blog:
http://joeposnanski.blogspot.com/2011/08/most-productive-player-award.html
This was a really cool side thought:
.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
GBTSQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]In 647 inning this Fuld has a Total Zone of 8. In over 300 innings prior to this season, he was league average. It’s entirely possible this season is more what his true talent is on defense, but for now I’ll assume he’s been worth 0 runs on defense. I just don’t care what the single season total is. I’ve tried to filter that out for over a year now unless I’m just looking for quick WAR numbers and am too lazy to subtract the defense.
If he somehow gets 3 more years of playing time (highly doubtful), I’ll look to see what he’s done and then adjust it at that point. Until then, he’s much closer to average than he is the 8 that he currently has. If anything, you have to regress the 8 UZR anyway as mgl has repeatedly said. So regress the 8 with 2+ seasons of league average and you get close to 0 anyway.[/quote]
I wouldn’t dispute any of this – my point was more accurately that this year Fuld has provided not insignificant value with his glove, without commenting on his true talent is in that regard. Trust me, I wanted Fuld done by mid-May; not bringing up Jennings or even Guyer may have cost enough wins to leave them dead in the race this year.
I don’t share your pessimism on their chances going forward; I think they can compete with the Red Sox and Yankees, even with the financial disadvantage. Will they win in the next 10 years? Probably not, but that’s mostly because every non-NYY/BOS has that same probability.
MishQuote Reply
[quote name=Tommy]Hak Ju-Lee would have allowed the Cubs to move Castro to 2B or maybe even CF. This would have been really nice because Lee apparently plays gold glove type d (according to a few scouts). But I think you are right in asserting that if Lee develops the Rays win the deal otherwise it looks like the Cubs will win the deal.
[/quote]
This could just be my crappy memory, but from what I remember Lee’s defense was described in similar terms to Castro’s. Good range, raw arm. Or am I completely wrong here? (dying laughing).
BerseliusQuote Reply
The problem with the Rays chances of success is that they don’t spend money. They can’t keep their free agents so every 5 years they’re going ot be retooling. For 2 or 3 of those years they’ll be OK or bad and then they might contend and then after that they do it all over again.
And that’s only if they continue to have strong drafts. Based on what we know, teams make up the difference quickly. After Beane started signing OBP guys, other teams started valuing them more highly. After they and others grabbed more and more analysts, all the teams did. There’s no reason to think that what the Rays have done so well won’t be done just as well going forward by a team with more money to spend. In fact, that’s exactly what I expect to happen. 10 years ago Billy Beane was considered the best GM. 5 years ago it was Theo. Now it’s Friedman. It’s unlikely he’ll be the best in 5 years. Probably not even in 2 or 3 years. Those best GMs are more likely to land in Boston and New York where they can make it even more difficult for the Rays.
I don’t say they won’t contend for just any reason. It’s because what they do well right now will be done as well by teams that spend money in the near future. Then it’s game over. I don’t think there’s any reason to think the Rays can remain on the cutting edge.
That’s the disadvantage that small market teams have. The Royals have the best farm system in baseball right now, but they won’t be able to retain those guys if they succeed.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]This could just be my crappy memory, but from what I remember Lee’s defense was described in similar terms to Castro’s. Good range, raw arm. Or am I completely wrong here? (dying laughing).[/quote]No, you’re right. It’s also worth noting he had 27 errors in 61 games in 2009, 34 errors last year, but has lowered that to 17 this season.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Aisle424]
The more pure talent they have, the less likely an occasional flake-out will snowball into an inning like in Game 2 of 2008 when Zambrano had to get like 8 outs to get out of the damn inning.[/quote]
NOT AN ACE
BerseliusQuote Reply
[quote name=mb21]
One other thing we’ve ignored recently is how good the MLB teams have been. Yeah, money matters, but the Yankees have proven they can have a good farm system and win a lot of games. [/quote]
The Mets prove the opposite
BerseliusQuote Reply
That was a ridiculus inning and I do remember fans blaming Zambrano. yeah, it’s his fault the entire fucking infield makes an error.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]The Mets prove the opposite[/quote](dying laughing) I was mostly talking about the Yankees, Red Sox and Rays. Those are the 3 GMs we’ve discussed over the last couple days and MLB performance matters, too. It is, after all, a big part of his job.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=mb21]In 647 inning this Fuld has a Total Zone of 8. In over 300 innings prior to this season, he was league average. It’s entirely possible this season is more what his true talent is on defense, but for now I’ll assume he’s been worth 0 runs on defense. I just don’t care what the single season total is. I’ve tried to filter that out for over a year now unless I’m just looking for quick WAR numbers and am too lazy to subtract the defense.
If he somehow gets 3 more years of playing time (highly doubtful), I’ll look to see what he’s done and then adjust it at that point. Until then, he’s much closer to average than he is the 8 that he currently has. If anything, you have to regress the 8 UZR anyway as mgl has repeatedly said. So regress the 8 with 2+ seasons of league average and you get close to 0 anyway.[/quote]
I like the idea of regressing against FSR (or some abstract ideal of a scouting database). Fangraphs has him at +2, but only got a number on him for 2009 (and who knows for what position).
BerseliusQuote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]I like the idea of regressing against FSR (or some abstract ideal of a scouting database). Fangraphs has him at +2, but only got a number on him for 2009 (and who knows for what position).[/quote]
fsr is supposed to be position-neutral, right?
GWQuote Reply
I like that better, too. I was just too lazy to get out my old BA handbooks and see what they had to say about his defense. If I recall, they said he was above average, but I don’t remember him being a great fielder.
Like dj said here recently, I’m skeptical of the value of players whose primary contribution is defense. Plus, I think we know enough about Sam Fuld to know he’s nothing more than a replacement level player and based on all but 19 games played to begin the season, he’s lived up to that. The Rays would have been much better to just bench him after his 19th game and not play him again.
mb21Quote Reply
[quote name=GW]fsr is supposed to be position-neutral, right?[/quote]
I can’t remember, though that’s certainly the way that I would set it up (dying laughing). It still needs some baseline position for 0 so you can add the defensive spectrum adjustments.
BerseliusQuote Reply
mb, looks like your delivery is going to be late
http://www.wkrn.com/story/15313584/ramp-to-i-65s-closed
BerseliusQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]
[/quote]LOGARITHMS!!
binkyQuote Reply
Just saw that Reed Johnson discussion from yesterday and wanted to point out that if you give him his career BABIP (.334) instead of this year’s BABIP (.4fucking38) for his 1b, 2b, and 3b numbers, his wOBA for this year would be sitting around .330 (instead of .406).
Too lazy to do the WAR calc now, but that would knock it down a peg or two.
fang2415Quote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]mb, looks like your delivery is going to be late
http://www.wkrn.com/story/15313584/ramp-to-i-65s-closed%5B/quote%5DThat's a sticky situation to find yourself in.
GBTSQuote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]mb, looks like your delivery is going to be late
http://www.wkrn.com/story/15313584/ramp-to-i-65s-closed%5B/quote%5D
(dying laughing)
GBTSQuote Reply
2008 Cubs were awesome. Everytime one guy was in a little slump, two other guys were hitting. It was the best mix of luck and skill ever.
binkyQuote Reply
[quote name=josh]2008 Cubs were awesome. Everytime one guy was in a little slump, two other guys were hitting. It was the best mix of luck and skill ever.[/quote]I fear it’s the best Cub team I’ll see in my lifetime. There wasn’t a single weakness.
GBTSQuote Reply
[quote name=Snyds01]Someone mentioned Pie being DFA’ed and I noticed how he was hitting, it got me thinking…
Felix Pie .220 .264 .280 .545 DFA
Austin Kearns .200 .302 .287 .589 DFA
Tyler Colvin .142 .198 .290 .488 CHC
Tony Campana .280 .313 .336 .649 CHC
Alfonso Soriano .240 .280 .456 .736 CHC
just how bad the Cubs outfield is…[/quote]Except Campana, the big difference there is power. Campana’s value is as a speedster. He’s a 1-tool player, but it’s good enough to keep him around, I guess. And Kearns is hitting for Zero power. Sori and Colvin at least have that as an upside.
binkyQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]I fear it’s the best Cub team I’ll see in my lifetime. There wasn’t a single weakness.[/quote]No postseason icewater in the veins.
binkyQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]I fear it’s the best Cub team I’ll see in my lifetime. There wasn’t a single weakness.[/quote]My memory tells me that they didn’t do so great in September, and I remember dawning dread, but then that’s the baggage the Cubs will always have.
binkyQuote Reply
[quote name=josh]My memory tells me that they didn’t do so great in September, and I remember dawning dread, but then that’s the baggage the Cubs will always have.[/quote]7 game winning streak to end August, followed by a 12-14 finish.
I was positive they were going to win the World Series that year.
GBTSQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]7 game winning streak to end August, followed by a 12-14 finish.
I was positive they were going to win the World Series that year.[/quote]God damn Manny Ramirez’s steroid using ass.
binkyQuote Reply
[quote name=GBTS]7 game winning streak to end August, followed by a 12-14 finish.
I was positive they were going to win the World Series that year.[/quote]
Shut us right up.
Rice CubeQuote Reply
damn it, Coleman.
josh22Quote Reply
How many of Jason Heyward’s career homers have been against the Cubs? Jeeeebus.
Steve SwisherQuote Reply
I love how Coleman always gets compared to Gregg Maddux. No one mentions the inability to locate his pitches where hitters can’t mash them. That seems to be a key difference.
josh22Quote Reply
Zonk: “The last time I saw a guy that hot was in the Little League World Series going on right now.”
/Pedobear’d
josh22Quote Reply
[quote name=josh22]Zonk: “The last time I saw a guy that hot was in the Little League World Series going on right now.”
/Pedobear’d[/quote]
Speaking of Zonk, what’s your take on him? I really want to like him… but I kinda don’t. He’s ok, but he’s not smart enough to give you good info, and he’s not colorful enough to be a Santo-esque character. He’s just kind of a guy who makes me cringe every time he pronounces Peña.
Steve SwisherQuote Reply
[quote name=josh]Except Campana, the big difference there is power. Campana’s value is as a speedster. He’s a 1-tool player, but it’s good enough to keep him around, I guess. And Kearns is hitting for Zero power. Sori and Colvin at least have that as an upside.[/quote]
The thing I was hoping to convey is that campana has the second best slg and ops and the best obp which suggests large amounts of suck from that list. But also to show just how bad Colvin is, when Pie is an upgrade.
Snyds22Quote Reply
[quote name=Snyds22]The thing I was hoping to convey is that campana has the second best slg and ops and the best obp which suggests large amounts of suck from that list. But also to show just how bad Colvin is, when Pie is an upgrade.[/quote]For sure, colvin is terrible. I’d argue that Colvin is younger and has more potential upside, except that it turns out he and Pie are the same age.
josh22Quote Reply
[quote name=Steve Swisher]Speaking of Zonk, what’s your take on him? I really want to like him… but I kinda don’t. He’s ok, but he’s not smart enough to give you good info, and he’s not colorful enough to be a Santo-esque character. He’s just kind of a guy who makes me cringe every time he pronounces Peña.[/quote]My take exactly. I was hoping they’d go with someone like Dave Otto I thought Dave did a solid job when he filled in a few times last year. The other thing with Zonk is that he doesn’t get Pat’s humor at all. Not that Pat is hilarious, but when the jokes fall completely flat there are always these awkward moments of silence or nervous laughter. At least Ron would play along. Pat and Zonk have zero chemistry, and Zonk alone is painful.
josh22Quote Reply
Other shit:
http://obstructedview.net/chicago-cubs/articles/the-end-of-an-era-in-aisle-424-is-officially-official.html
Aisle424Quote Reply
I like Zonk just fine. He obviously doesn’t have as much chemistry with Pat as Ron did, but I don’t have any complaints. One bonus with Zonk is that you don’t have JUDD SIROTT SCREAMING ALL THROUGH THE FIFTH INNING.
I was never a fan of Dave Otto, he was incredibly boring.
BerseliusQuote Reply
[quote name=Berselius]I like Zonk just fine. He obviously doesn’t have as much chemistry with Pat as Ron did, but I don’t have any complaints. One bonus with Zonk is that you don’t have JUDD SIROTT SCREAMING ALL THROUGH THE FIFTH INNING.
I was never a fan of Dave Otto, he was incredibly boring.[/quote]
Agreed on Otto. I like Pat, but he definitely is the straight man. With Otto, you’d have two straight men and the broadcasts would be snoozerific.
Also, Dave Otto would never be down with something like this:
Steve SwisherQuote Reply