Matt Garza Back On Track

[Rice Cube]

http://muskat.mlblogs.com/2012/11/15/1115-garza-gets-go-ahead/

Matt Garza was given the go-ahead to resume his normal offseason routine in preparation for Spring Training after getting a clean scan on his right elbow, the team announced Thursday. Garza, who turns 29 on Nov. 26, was shut down after his July 21 start because of a stress reaction in his right elbow. He underwent a scan this week which revealed he was healing as expected, and was cleared by team orthopedic specialist Dr. Stephen Gryzlo to resume his workouts. Fans did their best, sending get well wishes, and the right-hander tweeted his thanks. Garza tweeted: “I’m still getting ready for February!! Slow and steady is gonna win this race! #can’twait”

Sounds like he'll be ready by spring training. I don't think he can be traded before Opening Day, but hopefully he pitches well enough to bring back a haul like Anibal Sanchez did this past year. Someone's gotta be desperate, right?

 

[Rice Cube]

http://www.thecubreporter.com/stressed-area-near-matt-garzas-elbow-gets-scanned-soon

 

[daddies3angels]

i actually want him to be healthy so he gets extension. SP is hard to find as Cub fans are finding out so why trade one of the best young SP we have?

 

[Rice Cube]

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/12/28/matt-garza-vows-to-be-ready-for-opening-day/

Garza says he'll be ready for Opening Day. If that's the case, he should have gone a few starts in spring training in front of a bunch of scouts and could in fact be a trade candidate before Opening Day. Long shot, but here's hoping for good health whether he's traded or remains a Cub :woot:

 

[nwfisch]

i actually want him to be healthy so he gets extension. SP is hard to find as Cub fans are finding out so why trade one of the best young SP we have?

Because #Rickettscheap

 

[MRubio52]

i actually want him to be healthy so he gets extension. SP is hard to find as Cub fans are finding out so why trade one of the best young SP we have?

He's old and losing effectiveness IMO.

 

[brett05]

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/12/28/matt-garza-vows-to-be-ready-for-opening-day/

Garza says he'll be ready for Opening Day. If that's the case, he should have gone a few starts in spring training in front of a bunch of scouts and could in fact be a trade candidate before Opening Day. Long shot, but here's hoping for good health whether he's traded or remains a Cub :woot:

I would imagine that you'll get less in a trade prior to opening say than say Jun 1

 

[Jntg4]

I would imagine that you'll get less in a trade prior to opening say than say Jun 1

I'd say so too, IF Garza pitches well this first half anyway

 

[dabynsky]

I think that his value is so low that I want to see an extension, but all the local guys seem to think that is a long shot.

 

[waldo7239117]

He's old and losing effectiveness IMO.

Who's old? Because Garza is not.

 

[MRubio52]

Who's old? Because Garza is not.

For this team, for this year, wrong side of 30=old.

 

[MRubio52]

Whoops, he'll be 30 at the start of next year.

Still, he's not going to get better and I don't think it's worth it to keep him around.

 

[dabynsky]

For this team, for this year, wrong side of 30=old.

Garza is 29.

 

[dabynsky]

Whoops, he'll be 30 at the start of next year.

Still, he's not going to get better and I don't think it's worth it to keep him around.

You corrected this before my post went through (though I should point out he was born in November so he will be 29 through the entire baseball season), but I guess I don't understand the logic of trading Garza for less than a king's ransom. The Cubs have a trio of arms in that late 20 range now with Jackson, Garza, and Samardzija that provide a decent base for a rotation. They really could use an ace to put that group over that top, but those don't exactly grow on trees.

If Texas wants to panic and give us Olt for Garza, then sure I understand making that move, but I don't see that happening given the injury concerns and contract status.

 

[MRubio52]

You corrected this before my post went through (though I should point out he was born in November so he will be 29 through the entire baseball season), but I guess I don't understand the logic of trading Garza for less than a king's ransom. The Cubs have a trio of arms in that late 20 range now with Jackson, Garza, and Samardzija that provide a decent base for a rotation. They really could use an ace to put that group over that top, but those don't exactly grow on trees.

If Texas wants to panic and give us Olt for Garza, then sure I understand making that move, but I don't see that happening given the injury concerns and contract status.

He's not really worth a king's ransom.

Garza isn't an Ace, and teams aren't going to be very willing to give up a lot of value for him IMO.

I don't think he's going to be a guy that can be an anchor in a rotation much beyond 30. I didn't agree too much with the Jackson signing and I think giving Garza an extension would be a bad idea.

I think he's a good pitcher, but one who won't be a frontline starter in a couple of years.

 

[dabynsky]

He's not really worth a king's ransom.

Garza isn't an Ace, and teams aren't going to be very willing to give up a lot of value for him IMO.

I don't think he's going to be a guy that can be an anchor in a rotation much beyond 30. I didn't agree too much with the Jackson signing and I think giving Garza an extension would be a bad idea.

I think he's a good pitcher, but one who won't be a frontline starter in a couple of years.

I understand the position, but I disagree with the assessment. I think health, which is a legitimate concern, is the only reason why Garza wouldn't be an above average starter for the next several years. I would rather keep him if the other option is a bunch of Christian Villanueva at best type prospects in a deal.

 

[MRubio52]

I understand the position, but I disagree with the assessment. I think health, which is a legitimate concern, is the only reason why Garza wouldn't be an above average starter for the next several years. I would rather keep him if the other option is a bunch of Christian Villanueva at best type prospects in a deal.

You're more likely to get guys with ?'s than low level Villanueva types.

For instance, what in the Cubs system would you give up to get Garza?

I wouldn't go much above Dan Vogelbach.

 

[waldo7239117]

Yeah, I knew he was under 30 still and that's still a good age. Think of this ... Jackson is about the same age and will be 33 when his contract runs out. When the Cubs are about to contend, they'll both be around 30-31. So, if the Cubs can somehow sign him to a 4-year extension, almost like Jackson. I say go for it if no trade looks appealing.

For instance, if you can get Olt for Garza, you do it.

 

[dabynsky]

You're more likely to get guys with ?'s than low level Villanueva types.

For instance, what in the Cubs system would you give up to get Garza?

I wouldn't go much above Dan Vogelbach.

I think we agree what Garza's value on the trade market is right now. I think the point we debate is what do you do from that point on. If I may speak for you it seems the conclusion is take the B-/C+ prospects and run, and I would rather hold onto Garza and try to work out a reasonable extension with the qualifying offer in my backpocket as last resort. Fair?

 

[MRubio52]

I think we agree what Garza's value on the trade market is right now. I think the point we debate is what do you do from that point on. If I may speak for you it seems the conclusion is take the B-/C+ prospects and run, and I would rather hold onto Garza and try to work out a reasonable extension with the qualifying offer in my backpocket as last resort. Fair?

I don't assume the extension Garza will ask for will be reasonable.