Iowa
Off
Dallas Beeler threw 7 shutout innings while striking out 5 batters. Logan Watkins went 2-4 with a 2B & triple.
Alcantara had another big night going 4-5 and is now batting .306 on the year. Rob Whitenack is showing that not everyone comes back from TJ without any issues as he scuffled again last night giving up 8 hits, 3 walks and 5 ER in 2.1 IP last night.
Javier Baez hit HR # 6 yesterday and is now slugging .508. He also committed a pair of errors in the field. Michael Jensen had a decent start working 5 IP while allowing 1 ER and striking out 3.
Shawon Dunston Jr had a PH triple last night and Trey Martin picked up 3 hits as well. The pitching was awful though. So far only Tayler Scott has really stood out among the Boise staff.
GW wrote:
There are two things I dismiss about Garza: that’s he’s a really good pitcher and that he’s all that valuable. I discount this because he’s not a really good pitcher. He’s a good pitcher. He also makes a lot of money. I often dismiss what anonymous GMs say. It could just be posturing. Maybe it was 3 GMs. I recognize that some deals will go way above what the trade value shows and some way below. I see nothing in Garza’s performance plus salary to indicate he’ll bring more than we can expect from this type of analysis. However, I do see reasons why Darwin Barney won’t be so valuable. Had I not been a fan of Placido Polanco I may feel differently, but seeing how much he has been undervalued might tell us that teams aren’t willing to pay the same amount of money for a defensive win. I’d have to do a much more thorough analysis to know for sure, but it’s something I suspect is true.
Furthermore, this type of analysis is likely going to break down at the extremes. If the Cubs traded Starlin Castro after his rookie season I don’t believe for a minute some team would have given up $50 million surplus trade value to acquire him. Why would any team give up a similarly aged top prospect plus 2 or 3 other blue chips for one Starlin Castro? They wouldn’t. At the same time I don’t believe a poor hitting 2nd baseman who gets much of his value from questionable metrics is going to bring as much as someone who is just as valuable as Barney, but gets most of his production from his offense. Offense is easier to measure and defense is questionable at best. I’m not even sure teams would be better off looking at the defensive metrics we have or calling 5 or 6 scouts.
That said, if I was going to actually bet money on what the Cubs would get for Barney I’d be a lot closer to the surplus trade value than my own wild ass guess. Fortunately I don’t have to bet money on this.
If you’re a GM who would like to acquire Matt Garza and you’re asked how valuable he is in a trade, what would you say?
He’s OK, but I wouldn’t give up much to get him.
He’s a fantastic pitcher and he’s more valuable than a couple of the best pitchers in baseball.
It would seem to me that it would benefit such a GM to price as many GMs out of acquiring him as possible. It seems to me to be beneficial to say he’s worth a lot more than he is. The Cubs tried to trade him all offseason and we already learned that the Tigers weren’t willing to trade anyone like Turner or some other good hitting prospect for him. I don’t know why he’d have more value with only a 1+ years before being a free agent as opposed to 2.
As I said, I have no argument regarding Barney.
mb21 wrote:
His value will be determined by two.
Soler in Mesa
GW wrote:
Actually it will be 1 GM. There’s too much posturing that goes into these negotiations. One GM ultimately decides to give up too much. Maybe that happens with Garza. I could see it. I don’t think it will, but stranger things have happened.
My point was that I tend to discount these anonymous GMs because I have no reason to believe they’re being truthful.
@ GW:
Guy looks pretty big at his age.
@ mb21:
Two. Either Thoyer and a single trading partner or two potential partners if Thoyer is happy with more than one offer.
@ mb21:
definitely much taller than vogelbach. seems pretty strong, as well
@ GW:
Vogelbach doesn’t look as fat as I remember.
I’m going to start using the word, “fundamentalitude,” all the time in the hopes it enters the mainstream lexicon.
Mucker wrote:
This is fucking awesome: http://what-if.xkcd.com/1/
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
That’s hilarious.
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
The next Mythbusters?
@ GW:
I think the point was that whatever 1 GM makes the biggest (dumbest?) offer will be the one who gets him. Thoyer won’t have to make a hard sell.
Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn…
http://news.yahoo.com/baseball-cards-ohio-attic-might-fetch-millions-162732574–spt.html
Way to go, grandpa.
@ josh:
Yeah, if the Cubs do decide to trade him they’re trading him tot one GM who gave up too much. That’s what the Cubs are hoping for. The question is whether or not they’ll trade him if they get just a decent offer. Anybody have any guesses?
This Ryan Sweeney rumor that’s floating around is hilarious. Of course the Cubs would love to trade Dempster or Garza for a left-handed version of Reed Johnson (dying laughing)
@ Berselius:
It woud greatly improve the Cubs’ fundmentalitude and grinderscrapabilityness
@ mb21:
If it were up to me, I’d consider that Garza won’t be “good” or “very good” when it comes time to deal him next year or try to offer him an extension. I’d trade him for sure if the return was fair just because I’m not that high on him at his projected pricetag and his likely decline.
I don’t know what the Cubs will do though. I do feel like they lean towards a trade this month.
@ Mobile Rice:
I don’t know either, but I’m hoping they don’t sign him to an extension. I think they get a decent offer and take it. Garza just isn’t as good as a lot of people think. Here are his FIPs each season in his career:
4.57
4.18
4.14
4.17
4.42
2.95
4.37
The time to trade him and maximize his value was after last year.
I assume there will be an ASG game thread. BECAUSE IT COUNTS.
mb21 wrote:
I guess they were hoping to raid someone’s farm which is why they waited, but unfortunately it backfired.
@ Mercurial Outfielder:
at the risk of asking a really fucking dumb question, is that bullshit, or does that dude actually have a legit physics background? either way it was entertaining.
@ mb21:
yeah, i think they’d take a decent offer. no way is this team any good in 2013 or 2014. why not have someone eat a bunch of salary for you while you roll the dice on a few prospects? that’s the way i see it anyway. the only downside to that would be if a garza-less team sucks so horribly that fans leave in droves and the team earns less from concessions/ticket sales than the sum of garza’s salary. but i don’t see this happening.
actually, now that i’m thinking about this, do the cubs have any pressure to perform well over the next few years so they can get a more lucrative TV contract when their deal with WGN expires? i believe the WGN deal expires after the 2014 season, at which point it is at least sdomewhat realistic that they’ve just had 3 100-loss seasons. if their current ratings are shitty at that point, would TV stations lowball the team? no idea if this could be the case or if anything i said here is accurate but i wonder if this could be a reason for at least appearing to make an effort while they rebuild.
new shit: http://www.obstructedview.net/minor-leagues/obstructed-views-top-20-cubs-prospects.html
dj and I have been working on that for several days. Hope you enjoy.
i think we get 3-4 solid pieces for garza+demps
really curious to how big of a fire sale this will be