2010-11 Cubs Offseason: I, For One, Welcome Our New .196-Hitting Overlord

[BH]

Andy in the spotlight once again. Fading star my ass.

I wonder what 'Duk thinks about Andy's other offerings.

[Sterling Archer]

Andy in the spotlight once again. Fading star my ass.

I wonder what 'Duk thinks about Andy's other offerings.

He's even writing articles overseas.

[J. Walter Weatherman]

Andy in the spotlight once again. Fading star my ass.

I wonder what 'Duk thinks about Andy's other offerings.

He's even writing articles overseas.

Where on Earth did you find that link, Night Man?

[Eli]

Andy in the spotlight once again. Fading star my ass.

I wonder what 'Duk thinks about Andy's other offerings.

He's even writing articles overseas.

Where on Earth did you find that link, Night Man?

BUSTED

[Sterling Archer]

Andy in the spotlight once again. Fading star my ass.

I wonder what 'Duk thinks about Andy's other offerings.

He's even writing articles overseas.

Where on Earth did you find that link, Night Man?

From.....you?  Everyone was supposed to keep linking the same article.  Thanks a lot guys.

It definitely wasn't something like opening that other link in a new tab and forgetting about it and posting it later.  Nothing like that.

Tell me that I suck at the internet, Pen.  You'll feel better.  At least my link worked.

[Lance Dicksons Arm]

I don't see the point in trading good prospects unless it puts you in a position to win something right away.   Garza's a nice player, nothing against him...but this trade doesn't accomplish that.   I would have rather kept the prospects, punted the extra 4-6 games Garza might win, and rolled the dice that these prospects yield more than 4-6 games down the road.

And to whoever it was earlier that pointed out he's here for three seasons, and the Cubs will be more likely to contend then...well, that improvement is a little less likely with four fewer prospects in the hopper. 

This is why having a GM on thin ice, hanging around a bad team, is kind of a retarded concept.  I have no reason to believe that he's looking out as far as we are.

[Eli]

And to whoever it was earlier that pointed out he's here for three seasons, and the Cubs will be more likely to contend then...well, that improvement is a little less likely with four fewer prospects in the hopper. 

Not when the four prospects are a slick-fielding shortstop who can't hit, a 27-year-old catcher blocked by two players, a fourth outfielder and a pitcher with a ceiling similar to Matt Garza.

[SKO]

And to whoever it was earlier that pointed out he's here for three seasons, and the Cubs will be more likely to contend then...well, that improvement is a little less likely with four fewer prospects in the hopper. 

Not when the four prospects are a slick-fielding shortstop who can't hit, a 27-year-old catcher blocked by two players, a fourth outfielder and a pitcher with a ceiling similar to Matt Garza.

Yeah but the Cubs are a bad team. And they traded away prospects. Prospects are good. This much I know.

[Lance Dicksons Arm]

And to whoever it was earlier that pointed out he's here for three seasons, and the Cubs will be more likely to contend then...well, that improvement is a little less likely with four fewer prospects in the hopper. 

Not when the four prospects are a slick-fielding shortstop who can't hit, a 27-year-old catcher blocked by two players, a fourth outfielder and a pitcher with a ceiling similar to Matt Garza.

So by extension, based on where these guys were rated by people paid to do analysis and that statfaggory stuff, you must be implying that the Cubs farm system is/was total shit.  In that case, it's another reason to fire the GM.

Archer won the organizational pitching triple crown.  I'm not sure where the idea comes from that becoming Garza is his ceiling.

[Eli]

Archer won the organizational pitching triple crown.  I'm not sure where the idea comes from that becoming Garza is his ceiling.

Because most analysts have referred to him as having the ceiling of a No. 2/3 starter due to his control issues.  Some were even talking about eventually moving him to the bullpen because of his command.  Even when he had such good results at AA last year, he was walking over 5 guys per 9 innings.  His minor league numbers are pretty good, but they're not otherworldly like, say, Matt Garza's minor league numbers were.

If a team develops a prospect who turns out to be a No. 2/3 starter, that's a great showing for their farm system.  It's an even better showing if they can trade that prospect for a pitcher who's already proven he's a No. 2 starter. 

Archer has promise, but unless he magically figures out how to cut his walks in half as he faces tougher competition, he's not going to turn into an ace.

[Sterling Archer]

And to whoever it was earlier that pointed out he's here for three seasons, and the Cubs will be more likely to contend then...well, that improvement is a little less likely with four fewer prospects in the hopper.  

Not when the four prospects are a slick-fielding shortstop who can't hit, a 27-year-old catcher blocked by two players, a fourth outfielder and a pitcher with a ceiling similar to Matt Garza.

So by extension, based on where these guys were rated by people paid to do analysis and that statfaggory stuff, you must be implying that the Cubs farm system is/was total shit.  In that case, it's another reason to fire the GM.

Archer won the organizational pitching triple crown.  I'm not sure where the idea comes from that becoming Garza is his ceiling.

It's not a far-fetched idea.

Minor League Garza, age 21-24 (4 seasons):
2.96 ERA
307 IP
7.5 H/9
2.6 BB/9
10.0 SO/9

Minor League Archer, age 17-22 (5 seasons):
3.67 ERA (advantage Garza)
444.1 IP
7.1 H/9 (advantage Archer)
5.2 BB/9 (advantage Garza, by a lot.  Possibly explained by age difference, possibly not)
9.1 SO/9 (advantage Garza)

Edit: What Eli said.  Also, you say "Garza is his ceiling" like that's a bad thing.

[SKO]

Archer won the organizational pitching triple crown.  I'm not sure where the idea comes from that becoming Garza is his ceiling.

Because most analysts have referred to him as having the ceiling of a No. 2/3 starter due to his control issues.  Some were even talking about eventually moving him to the bullpen because of his command.  Even when he had such good results at AA last year, he was walking over 5 guys per 9 innings.  His minor league numbers are pretty good, but they're not otherworldly like, say, Matt Garza's minor league numbers were.

If a team develops a prospect who turns out to be a No. 2/3 starter, that's a great showing for their farm system.  It's an even better showing if they can trade that prospect for a pitcher who's already proven he's a No. 2 starter. 

Archer has promise, but unless he magically figures out how to cut his walks in half as he faces tougher competition, he's not going to turn into an ace.

Summarize your exact feelings and justification for this trade into a couple sentences that I can condescendingly pass off to my friends as my own thoughts.

[CT III]

Archer won the organizational pitching triple crown.  I'm not sure where the idea comes from that becoming Garza is his ceiling.

Because most analysts have referred to him as having the ceiling of a No. 2/3 starter due to his control issues.  Some were even talking about eventually moving him to the bullpen because of his command.  Even when he had such good results at AA last year, he was walking over 5 guys per 9 innings.  His minor league numbers are pretty good, but they're not otherworldly like, say, Matt Garza's minor league numbers were.

If a team develops a prospect who turns out to be a No. 2/3 starter, that's a great showing for their farm system.  It's an even better showing if they can trade that prospect for a pitcher who's already proven he's a No. 2 starter. 

Archer has promise, but unless he magically figures out how to cut his walks in half as he faces tougher competition, he's not going to turn into an ace.

Summarize your exact feelings and justification for this trade into a couple sentences that I can condescendingly pass off to my friends as my own thoughts.

Matt Garza defines everything what a major league pitcher is suppose to be but isn’t.

[Internet Apex]

Archer won the organizational pitching triple crown.  I'm not sure where the idea comes from that becoming Garza is his ceiling.

Because most analysts have referred to him as having the ceiling of a No. 2/3 starter due to his control issues.  Some were even talking about eventually moving him to the bullpen because of his command.  Even when he had such good results at AA last year, he was walking over 5 guys per 9 innings.  His minor league numbers are pretty good, but they're not otherworldly like, say, Matt Garza's minor league numbers were.

If a team develops a prospect who turns out to be a No. 2/3 starter, that's a great showing for their farm system.  It's an even better showing if they can trade that prospect for a pitcher who's already proven he's a No. 2 starter.  

Archer has promise, but unless he magically figures out how to cut his walks in half as he faces tougher competition, he's not going to turn into an ace.

Summarize your exact feelings and justification for this trade into a couple sentences that I can condescendingly pass off to my friends as my own thoughts.

He is an extremely talented if somewhat controversial player entering the prime of his career. But his attitude and ability to lead are widely questioned. He can be brilliant and he can be otherwise and he can be a royal dick. When he entered the league, he was touted as a future star, though has yet to actually crack the ceiling that his ability suggests. The team gave up a fortune for him and it was worth it because...

ARMCOCK!

That work?

[Lance Dicksons Arm]

I guess I'm going to be optimistic and say that I'd hope for a higher ceiling from our top pitching prospect than a future career record of 2 under .500 and an ERA just short of 4....but would accept that if it's what Archer were to have eventually produced.  Perhaps that's foolish given Hendry's history of developing arms....not sure.

I'm not trying to short Garza.  But to this point, he hasn't exactly been an ace.  He has 5 years worth of MLB data at this point....so I'm not compelled by what his minor league numbers were.  They sort of don't matter at this point.