The Dodgers and Cubs are discussing possible trades that would send either Ryan Dempster or Matt Garza to Los Angeles, Jon Heyman of CBSSports.com reports. The Dodgers are seen as a favorite to acquire Dempster, and they’ve also had conversations about Garza.
The Dodgers are expected to pursue upgrades aggressively in their first summer under new ownership. They have the resources to take on large contracts like Dempster’s ($14MM) and Garza’s ($9.5MM), but the Cubs prefer to obtain talent in trades even if it means getting less salary relief.
Dempster, 35, recently returned from the disabled list. He has a league-leading 1.99 ERA with 7.3 K/9 and 2.3 BB/9 in 86 innings and will hit free agency this coming offseason. Garza, 28, has a 4.32 ERA with 8.3 K/9 and 2.8 BB/9 in 93 2/3 innings. He’ll go to arbitration once more next winter and hit free agency following the 2013 campaign.
If a deal does happen Ned is bound to acquire the “veteran presence” who is bound to regress rather than the 28 year old with at least some upside. Here’s hoping the new ownership has more influence…
Dempster would be the cheapest to get because of his age, contract and being a free agent at the end of the year. shouldnt take no more then 1 player to get him if not two low level minor leaguers.
They are not going to give up dempster for two low level minor leaguers- He’s the best pitcher currently in the National League, and we are looking for talent, not two throw in’s. The Cubs are also willing to resign him for two more years, and build around him and Garza. If the Dodgers are willing to give us some major league ready prospects, then the deal will get done!
Garza, the best pitcher in the National League? Uhhh..No. he is prety good, but far from the best.
Mike was talking about Dempster
Also, the Cubs could offer arb and net a supplemental pick if he declines, so the cost of Dempster is that PLUS the value for the second half of the season.
Besides the fact that they can’t offer arbitration, good post.
“best pitcher in the national league” very funny. I am a Cubs fan and this one is a bit ridiculous. they will be lucky to get rid of Dempster without having to pay all of his remaining salary, let alone get a “major-league ready” prospect. Just get a pitcher from A or AA and get it over with.
With as many teams that are in the hunt this years seems like they will overpay especially with the knd of year Dempster is having the Cubs should get what they want out of him.
you are correct about a massive over pay, you must know who our GM is!! BUT seriously, he did just come back from the DL, that is gonna knock the price down just a tad.
P.S. mike, he is not the best pitcher in the NL by any means…
With so many “massive overpays” does anyone get a “massive underpay?” Just wondering about how this pay thing averages out.
I think you know what he’s talking about..lol.
A “massive overpay” in terms of players is the Teixeira to Atlanta deal.
A “massive underpay” would then be something like (from the Rangers perspective) Volquez for Hamilton.
Hamilton was nothing like he is now when that deal happened. The trade was even the first year because Volquez had a great year going to the ASG. Rangers obviously won in the end, but it wasn’t a massive underpay for the Rsngers until 2010.
If only that didn’t happen…. Votto and Hamilton in the same major league lineup (They played w/ each other in the minors).
I never quite know what to make of this massive overpay thing. Seems like teams are massively overpaying constantly. If quality starting pitching is in short supply at the trade deadline (and like this year, it usually is), then the price is going to be higher than it might be otherwise. The market for players changes all the time, it’s just the nature of the beast. Teams with quality starters to deal are going to get a haul, and that’s the name of that tune.
Deals seem like “massive overpays” more often initially because the prospects involved might be a little overrated. I don’t have the stats on it…but I’d conjure a guess that more often than not the prospects don’t pan out as well as anticipated. Sometimes ALL of them do as in the Teixeira deal…but there are likely more cases where the players only turn out so-so.
Yes there are massive overpays, you cant think of any? Our GM has a track record for doing so. So, I can solve this with one name, NED COLLETTI!!! Does J-MAC and Lambo for a 3 month rental of Dotel sting? DEFINITION of overpay Ned Colletti.
You are very good at predicting the past. So am I, but I don’t brag about it.
Are you telling me you dont learn from the past experiences? I feel people have a track record and it should be called upon in when relevant. “predicting”? HA!!! : )
They will get fair market value for him. Sub 2 ERA, and a bunch of tough luck losses. The Cubs may end up paying the remainder of his deal but they will get a quality guy or 2 in return for him.
I agree. They’re not going to trade Dempster unless they get fair market value. This isn’t like when we dumped Maddux to the Dodgers. I still think Dempster has 2-3 good years left and is currently pitching better than ever. The Cubs will ONLY pay his salary if they get better prospects. If they’re not adequately compensated by someone in a trade, they would probably rather keep him and have the draft pick.
Cubs will probably pay most of his salary in a deal, it will net better and/or more prospects in the return. Same goes for Soriano, although they’re going to take what they can get for him at this point.
He’s not the best pitcher in the NL. He’s been great, and could help virtually any team in the playoff hunt, but he’s not the best pitcher. His BABIP and HR/9 indicate that he’s getting a lot of luck this year which is helping bring that ERA down to 1.99. But give me Cole Hamels, Matt Cain, Clayton Kershaw, Greinke, or Strasburg before Dempster.
He’s also 35… the Cubs are not going to be “building” around him. If they really want to rebuild he’s exactly the kind of guy they need to trade. Good enough to bring back a high quality prospect, but too old to really count on for the future of the organization.
I like some of your logic, but some of it is off as well…. This is a guy that has a below average defense behind him, with poor range. I agree give me all of those guys before Demp, but outside of Greinke (who I wouldn’t take over Demp anyways) none of them are available…
“He’s the best pitcher currently in the National League”
Guessing that is based on the current ERA standings, but he’s far from the best pitcher.
dempster the best pitcher in the NL? haha funny. lets compare him to the guys who have pitched the whole season and not been on the DL yet.
R.A. Dickey 12-1 2.40 ERA 123 K’s
Gio Gonzalez 12-3 2.90 ERA 118 K’s
Matt Cain 9-3 2.62 ERA 118 K’s AND a perfect game
those are just naming a couple pitchers who are better then dempster, 2 of which who have helped turned their teams around with their great outtings.
Im not saying dempster isnt a good pitcher, but he is no where near the best pitcher in the NL. Major league level prospects is not necesarilly top prospects either. so again nothing other then and ill rephrase my ” low level ” average at best prospects.
isn’t Grienke available?
I cant imagine many teams building around a 35 year old pitcher
knowing ned, dempster will cost us 2 top 5 prospects and we’ll all be wondering why he didn’t just get garza instead
ugh… the worst.
I don’t think Stan Kasten will allow Colletti to do something stupid here.
If the Dodgers get Dempster, one of the players in return will be Lee, Gould, or perhaps Eovaldi along with one or more 11-20 prospect in the Dodgers system. No way they get Dempster for 2 lower level guys. And they will not get Garza.
I couldn’t see them trading G. Gould for C. Lee but G. Gould and one or two other low level prospects I could see being happening in atrade for Dempster. Dodgers wont give up their best arms though, not for Dempster.
Don’t overlook a bigger deal with Russell, Baker or LeHair being involved and getting two top prospects from Dodgers and 2 lower level 11-20 prospects.
last report said it might be for Gould and Withrow
If you think Theo is gonna flip Demps for a couple low level minor leaguers, your crazy. Demps is arguably pitching as well as anybody in the game, his split is devastating, look it up if you need to. Demps loves it in Chicago and also has no trade, but hes willing to waive it. The leverage here is with Theo, everybody needs pitching, he has it and there isn’t many sellers at this point. Name somebody besides Hamels (who isn’t going anywhere) in the same league as Garza or Demps who is on the market for pitchers, Wandy? Id rather have Demps or Garza. The added wild card has given alot more teams a chance which includes alot more buyers. Also given is the fact that the Cubs are willing to eat most if not all salary to get better prospects in return, and they are desperate for good young arms.
Anybody got an idea on the dodgers top prospects we could get back?
Lee, Gould, or Eovaldi (one of these), plus 1-2 more lower level.
Dodgers don’t want to give up there best prospects. If they do it will be for a guy like Hamels, but they can get him in the off season. Dempster is kinda old and has been on the DL this season so out of those three I could only see Gould being delt, again with one or two others.
a guy like Hamels will take 2 or all 3 of them.
Right. Not sure they got the pieces, but I’m sure they wait till the off season for him.
For a rental? Absolutely not.
“Name somebody besides Hamels (who isn’t going anywhere) in the same league as Garza or Demps who is on the market for pitchers”
Greinke, the only true ace that is on the market.
If Hamels “isn’t going anywhere”, then how is he on the market?
The Phils are being very coy about whether they’d prefer to trade or extend Hamels, and clearly they could go either way, depending on the price.
This is off topic, but what do you think of this deal:
Dodgers get:
Ryan Dempster
Cubs get:
Ethan Martin
Blake Smith
I don’t know if you’ve moved on from this post, but I have read your comments before and respect your opinions.
Based entirely on the interest in Dempster I have a feeling he will cost more than a couple of mid-A ball prospects. Martin may be close to the majors but I don’t know about Smith. Seems he’s further off. But it’s all speculation. I can’t claim to know what kind of offers the Cubs are getting or what they feel they need.
The asking price for hamels is 4-5 prospects, thats the phillies saying “give us all your farm or no deal”. Im pretty sure hamels wont be dealt this season.
Assuming he isn’t extended very soon, I think Hamels will be traded, but not before the horn blows at midnight.
Do the Royals want either? They need to try to get Wil Myers in Wrigley.
Pretty sure the Royals aren’t dealing Wil Myers for a guy who’s only under team control (Garza) for another year and a half. I know the Royals need pitching, but if they were to deal Myers, it would be for a cost-controlled high-upside guy like Gerritt Cole (note this is only an example).
To me, it’s not necessarily worth Lee, Eovaldi, or Gould for a half season of post DL Ryan Dempster.
Much more concerned about 3B and 1B. If they can get away with filling another hole for Chicago it may be worth it.
I’m not sure why everyone keeps bringing up his DL stint, he came back and threw 5 shutout innings with 4k’s and no walks prior to the AS break and has never been an injury prone player. And just saying but the chances of Lee/Eovaldi or Gould ever being as good as Dempster or Garza aren’t super high, the chances any prospect ever reaches their ceiling is pretty low actually. I’m sure something would be done for guys like Allen Webster or Chris Reed over those 3 anyway.
Sure, prospects don’t always reach their ceiling, but that doesn’t change the fact that they need to be used carefully and used to bring back the right value to the team.
Before saying that those guys will likely not be as good as Garza or Dempster, let’s compare…and yes these are SUPER TINY sample sizes.
Eovaldi
First 18 Games (Ages 21 & 22)
2-7, 3.97 ERA, 1.4 WHIP, 5.2 K/9
Dempster
First 14 Games (Age 21)
1-7, 7.08 ERA, 2.05 WHIP, 5.8 K/9
Garza
First 10 games (Age 22)
3-6, 5.76 ERA, 1.7 WHIP, 6.8 K/9
I think that’s an unfair sample of Dempster, he wasn’t anywhere near the SP he’s been in Chicago while in FLA and Cincy. After they converted him off of an RP he improved on his walk and k totals. Since being a starter in Chicago for 5 years, hes had an era of 3.45 while pitching over 200 innings each year prior to this one and has struck out around 8 per 9ip.
I think if we were to get Garza I wouldn’t mind giving up Eovaldi and Gould. But not for old Dempster.
Right, and even more to the point, not for two months of Dempster. He might be having a career-best season, but his numbers over the course of that career are unspectacular. The sustainability of this season’s performance has to be questioned, and especially now that he’s coming off the DL, a reversion to the mean has to be anticipated.
Since he was converted back into a starter in Chicago he has a career ERA of 3.45, and hes pitched 200 innings each of those seasons while striking out around 8 per 9. If that’s the mean your talking about that’s not too bad.
Granted he’s had a couple of fine seasons with the Cubs, but also some mediocre ones. And his first several years as a starter with the Marlins weren’t exactly inspiring. At this point in his career Dempster is a good middle-rotation starter, maybe a little better than a journeyman, but not a whole lot. It’s only in the weak field of trade deadline offerings that he’s looking to some like an ace.
He is pitching pretty well with a weak defense and no run support!
Are the Dodgers going to go with a 6 man rotation? Kershaw and Capuano have ERA’s under 3.00. Harang is at 3.51, and Billingsley is at 4.30. Lilly started throwing again recently and should be back soon, and he was pitching very well before his injury. Dempster is obviously an upgrade somewhere in the rotation, but the Dodgers’ problem is clearly a lack of offense.
They would definitely move Billingsley out of the rotation in a heartbeat. He’s lost his last 5 starts and can’t seem to hold a lead past the 5th inning.
I wonder if Billingsley could be involved in the trade, then. The Cubs are able to be more patient with a struggling pitcher than a team in the playoff hunt would be.
The Cubs aren’t taking on 9 million in salary for a struggling pitcher. The Cubs want prospects!
Billingsley may be struggling, but you guys forget he still has upside at age 27, while those prospects could become nothing, or rentals, like the guys we gave you for Lilly and Theriot.
It doesn’t matter if he has upside, the Cubs are not taking on salary! Yeah those players never became anything, however the Cubs aren’t being managed by Jim Hendry anymore!
He’s been in the league since 2006 and has only declined since the first part of his career. A team can only be so patient for any “upside” to make itself evident. If the Dodgers gave up on him right now I would not blame them, no matter how good Chad ever became. It’s been long enough.
i might take Billingsley for Dempster. Billingsley’s still got a lot of potential and should be just entering his prime for a pitcher.
It never hurts to have extra arms, especially good arms. Bills started his career in the bullpen and would be the natural choice to move there given his struggles recently.
Most starters have some history in the pen, but I would not assume that Billingsley automatically goes there if they trade for another starter. The first to go into the pen (or down) is Eovaldi. Then if/when Lilly comes back the decision has to be made and will depend on who’s hot and who’s not at that moment.
Why? Eovaldi has been significantly better than 5-inningsley. Chad would excel as a long reliever, where he wouldn’t have to worry about that big meltdown inning in which he gives back whatever lead he’s handed, if any.
Who is better then?
Dempster > Garza for this season.
I would love if my team were to trade for Dempster, very solid veteran pitcher who can be a top 3 guy in a rotation, a team adding him to the back of their rotation is overkill. He shouldn’t cost a lot either. Maybe one top 10 prospect from your team and a live arm/mlb ready average pitcher.
this season and every other season except for 2011
I dont see why we want Garza but if we took both guys it would be 3 prospects and we also dont have the talent pool in the farm system to make this trade and then another for a corner infielder. We’re looking to spend money not resources. ~ @Angry_Albert
Giving up anything to get Dempster is huge mistake. We must go after a #2 potential starter, Garza. We need to go into the playoffs with a strong 1-2 punch and Kershaw and Dempster is far from a formidable tandem. If the Dodgers were smart, give up Lee, Eovaldi, Webster (or) Gould, Martin so we can a acquire an ace who will thrive in Dodger stadium.
If I am the Cubs, done deal!
You don’t give up Lee, Eovaldi, Webster or Gould for Garza. Zach Lee has been phenomenal in the minors, as well as Webster, and Eovaldi is already in the majors, why give up those potential starters, or trade chips, for Matt Garza, when we have much bigger holes to fill, namely 3B, 1B and LF?
If you trade Lee, it will be for Upton from the D-Bags, or for Chase Headley in SD, you DO NOT trade these prospects for a, at best No. 3 starter.
Yes, you do give one of them up for Garza, if not two. Garza is a legitimate #2 with a proven track record and another full season of team control. Lee, Eovaldi, Webster and Gould may have that potential, but it is probably their ceiling. None of them are widely regarded as ace material.
And I’m a Dodger fan, I’m just realistic.
one of these pickups would be good but need some offensive help to maybe Bryan Lahair to play first base or some help at 3rd base or another guy to play left field to help out kemp and ethier when they come back from the DL
Trade Zach Lee for Chase Headley of SD for 3B, and then see if you can’t get Upton from Arizona, if not, play it safe and keep your prospects, who are tearing up double A right now.
Since mid-May LaHair has hit .220/.277/.362, for a .640 OPS.
I want to replace Loney as much as anyone, but LaHair is NOT the solution.
I think the reason that Dempster isn’t already a Dodger is due to Stan holding it up. Why give up pieces of an already weak farm system for Dempster? I think for a rental we’re assuming we make the playoffs and that would be the reason for this trade…
That said, Dempster is garbage in the playoffs and not worth any of our already shallow farm. If we’re going after pitching it needs to be for players under control.
I like how you claim he is garbage when it comes to post-season pitching when he only has two starts on the books. Way to select a fair sample size.
I like how you cubs fans are claiming that he’s good, when he only has like 2 good to great seasons (under 3 ERA). Way to select a fair sample size. Not to mention the fact that he’s ancient.
Three way between TOR, LAD, CHI?
TOR GETS: Billingsley
LAD GETS: Garza, Dempster
CHI GETS: prospects from TOR, and two from LAD
There has been some talk about possible three way trades and your proposal does fit the needs for all teams involved, but I’m not so certain the Cubs would get the type of prospects they would desire from Toronto, for only Billingsly. I think they would be better off trading Garza to Toronto for a few of their top pitching prospects, which are said to be amongst some of the best in the baseball, and send LaHair to the Dodgers with Demp for one prospect in the 1-5 range, 1 in the 10-20 range and another low level prospect with high upside.
Bills has been edgy all season long, and Eovaldi has recently become a little suspect, but I still maintain that better SP will make us slightly harder to beat, what we really need is some offense. We need a solution for the corners. In no way shape or form should we give up prospects to gain a good arm. I would rather NOT give up a good arm to get some offense at the corners, but it would at least make more sense. We can just about win any game when Kershaw, Cap and Harrang pitch, and can probably win plenty of games with Bills and Eovaldi starting (and Lilly is on his way back too)…IF WE HAVE some consistent bats. Granted, Kemp and Ethier are almost back, and Ellis IS back, and while Ethier has been doing a solid job, it would be great if we can find a bat to protect him.
We’ve shown what we can do with what we have, we had the best record in all of MLB for most of the first half, and it was practically ALL on the backs of our pitching (starting and bullpen). Think about how many 1-run games we’ve won (and lost), a big(ger) bat would do us good. Although I am almost ready for the Loney Experiment to be over, I think he’s still OK, Uribe on the other hand, needs to be benched and we need some production from that corner.
At the very least, we should be concentrating on: 3B highest priority, and then 1B. I think Gordon is young enough that he will mature, and play better ball and be a better lead off hittter, so with a better bat in the lineup, we can afford to let Gordon mature a little more, without a better 3B/1B, we just cannot afford to have Gordon learn on the job. I a like Herrera as lead off now, but despite Gordon’s error prone work at SS, hes still very athletic and had a great arm. They guy just needs to learn quicker, and he’ll be solid.
Long story, still long: FIND A 3B, or have Hairston play 3B and find an upgrade at 1B.
I’d really love it if LA made a deal for Chase Headley, he’s batting .268/.368/.413, out of Petco Park (notorious for being poison for hitters), his line increases to .275/.378/.471. The Padres have stated that they wouldn’t mind trading within the division.
I’ve also heard that Colorado is interested in shipping out CarGo, who I think is vastly overrated, but would be a huge upgrade at LF. His home/road splits are insane (.390/.450/.714 in Colorado, a much more down to earth .273/.330/.447 away from Coors, as well as only 5 homeruns away from Coors). If the Dodgers managed to aquire both of these players, we could live with Loney’s mediocre bat at 1st because of his good defense.
Our line up would be very good with Headley and Carlos Gonzalez in it, and it would likely make Loney bat 7th and Dee Gordon bat 8th. I could certainly live with that.
There is no way the Dodgers could acquire BOTH Headley and CarGo. Headley might have the most value of any player that is “openly” being shopped, not to mention the surcharge for trading within the division. And as for CarGo, I am not sure if the Dodgers have enough to the Rockies even interested.
the fact is the Dodgers have huge problems at every infield position, except 2nd base, and they have a thin farm system. I really like Dempster and Garza, but the Dodgers need help at 1st or 3rd and that is where we should focus. Only way I trade our top prospects for Dempster is if the Cubs will take Colletti, Uribe and Loney.
Not a bad proposal, but I don’t think you’d be able to get Zach Lee from LA, perhaps Webster, but probably Gould. Maybe you’d take Loney (expiring contract) off of our hands as well?
While Gordon is a problem, remember that he’s still young, and the Dodgers shouldn’t do anything at the SS spot. The focus should be 3B, since Chase Headley is way better than anybody we could get at 1B. Wouldn’t mind aquiring a LF as well, I’ve heard Colorado is dangling Carlos Gonzalez as a trade chip. He’s way overrated because his home/road splits are insane (
(.390/.450/.714 in Colorado, a much more down to earth .273/.330/.447 away from Coors, as well as only 5 homeruns away from Coors), but he would still be a huge upgrade over what we currently have. With those two (Headley, CarGo), we could live with Loney’s mediocre bat, but good defense.
We don’t have the prospects to pull of a trade for Carlos Gonzalez. Not to mention the Rockies would demand more from a team within the division, if they’d be willing to trade him within the division at all.
I doubt we’ll get Headley for the same reasons, though it is a bit more feasible.