Steve Phillips, ESPN: CHI/COL/PIT

[NorthsideAvenger]

Upon further review, Dan O'Dowd is a liar

 

Hawpe off trade market

By Troy E. Renck

Denver Post Staff Writer

Article Last Updated:11/28/2006 11:39:59 PM MST

 

Rockies right fielder Brad Hawpe isn't going anywhere and the starting rotation could return intact as well. After receiving inquiries from the Cardinals, Phillies and Pirates, the Rockies assured Hawpe's agent Tuesday that they have no plans to trade the 27-year-old slugger.

 

The Cardinals did land someone on the Rockies' radar by signing starter Kip Wells, increasing the likelihood Josh Fogg will return to Colorado.

 

Rockies general manager Dan O'Dowd said Monday that "it's very possible we will have the same five starters."

 

The club, for now, is holding on to Jason Jennings - add the Cardinals to the teams that have expressed interest - and has Aaron Cook, Jeff Francis and Byung-Hyun Kim under contract. Fogg is arbitration eligible.

 

The Rockies are expected to begin negotiations with Fogg next week. They must offer him a contract by Dec. 12 or make him a free agent.

 

To add depth, the Rockies signed pitcher Eric Dubose to a minor-league contract.

 

That's waht gets me....if you weren't "shopping Hawpe", then why are you fielding calls about him? O'Dowd may have no intentions of trading Hawpe, but the facts are he is at least fielding those calls, and if I was Hawpe, I would tell my agent, I don't want to play for an organization that lies to me, but that is just me.

[Mizzou]

We're giving up Jacque Jones and Carlos Marmol for a guy who posted an ERA over 5 the three years prior to his last season, which was the utter definition of a career year? No thanks. Surely the market for Jones is better than that.

[JeffH]

The most comical part of this "rumored" three way trade is that it's not a three way trade at all.

 

It's two separate two way trades.

 

Let's move on to the next piece of nonsense.

[Shawon12]

Am I the only one here that thinks it's good to be getting rid of Jacque after having a career year?

 

I don't see him repeating last year, but that's just me.

 

People, Jones did not have a "career year". It was above his average, but not career. I wish people would stop saying that as a way to justify the overreacting, bandwagoning negitive response they had from his signing last year. He is who he is.

[Soul]

We're giving up Jacque Jones and Carlos Marmol for a guy who posted an ERA over 5 the three years prior to his last season, which was the utter definition of a career year? No thanks. Surely the market for Jones is better than that.

 

Good point. I guess he gets a pass because he pitched at Coors field?

[radarluv1]

Upon further review, Dan O'Dowd is a liar

 

Hawpe off trade market

By Troy E. Renck

Denver Post Staff Writer

Article Last Updated:11/28/2006 11:39:59 PM MST

 

Rockies right fielder Brad Hawpe isn't going anywhere and the starting rotation could return intact as well. After receiving inquiries from the Cardinals, Phillies and Pirates, the Rockies assured Hawpe's agent Tuesday that they have no plans to trade the 27-year-old slugger.

 

The Cardinals did land someone on the Rockies' radar by signing starter Kip Wells, increasing the likelihood Josh Fogg will return to Colorado.

 

Rockies general manager Dan O'Dowd said Monday that "it's very possible we will have the same five starters."

 

The club, for now, is holding on to Jason Jennings - add the Cardinals to the teams that have expressed interest - and has Aaron Cook, Jeff Francis and Byung-Hyun Kim under contract. Fogg is arbitration eligible.

 

The Rockies are expected to begin negotiations with Fogg next week. They must offer him a contract by Dec. 12 or make him a free agent.

 

To add depth, the Rockies signed pitcher Eric Dubose to a minor-league contract.

 

That's waht gets me....if you weren't "shopping Hawpe", then why are you fielding calls about him? O'Dowd may have no intentions of trading Hawpe, but the facts are he is at least fielding those calls, and if I was Hawpe, I would tell my agent, I don't want to play for an organization that lies to me, but that is just me.

 

i think any GM would be wise to at least listen to offers.

[goonys evil twin]

That's waht gets me....if you weren't "shopping Hawpe", then why are you fielding calls about him? O'Dowd may have no intentions of trading Hawpe, but the facts are he is at least fielding those calls, and if I was Hawpe, I would tell my agent, I don't want to play for an organization that lies to me, but that is just me.

 

Shopping a player indicates you are out there offering him to other teams in hopes of making a trade, like the Cubs did with Patterson, Farnsworth and Sosa, and reportedly are doing with Jones. Fielding calls is completely different. Any player who cries to his agent about wanting to leave a team that is fielding calls about him has no case. GMs would be hurting their team if they weren't willing to field calls.

[RynoRules]

I think O'Dowd is full of it. It would be very unlikely that specific names would leak the way they did unless they had actually been discussed.

 

That said, if we are dealing Jacque and Marmol, I'd like to get Jennings plus a prospect.

[TheDude]

This thread shows that Cubs fans continue to overvalue Cubs prospects. I think Tim has the right idea, trade Jones and Marmol for Jennings, with one year in mind.

 

Only one of the Cubs propsects besides Hill is going to see the rotation in 2008 or beyond, in all likelihood. There is no point in keeping them all.

 

This lets the remaining kids develop one more year. Groom a replacement for Jennings. Then let Jennings walk and receive an "A" prospect for him from whatever team signs him.

 

The long-term cost is Jones for Jennings, as the prospect value washes out. I like Marmol, but he is not going to get his shot in Chicago again.

[Elrhino]

This thread shows that Cubs fans continue to overvalue Cubs prospects.

 

Its quite humorous to read really. Marmol, Marshall, Guzman and Mateo will be battling to fill out MAYBE the 5th spot in the rotation of a club that is so desperate for pitching they need two pichers in a thin free agent market ... yet somehow to Cub fans they're all potential middle of the rotation pitchers (at least) and big time bargaining chips.

 

If we're lucky, one of these guys steps up and becomes a servicable back end of the rotation starter. By the end of this spring traing, the remainders will have next to no value. What ones that do retain a smidgen of value will soon see it plummet as they're leapfrogged in the organization by Gallagher (and perhaps some other low level prospects). Its already a given that Guzman will have no value once he's injured again.

Edited December 5, 2006 by Elrhino

[UK1679666180]

This thread shows that Cubs fans continue to overvalue Cubs prospects. I think Tim has the right idea, trade Jones and Marmol for Jennings, with one year in mind.

 

Only one of the Cubs propsects besides Hill is going to see the rotation in 2008 or beyond, in all likelihood. There is no point in keeping them all.

 

This lets the remaining kids develop one more year. Groom a replacement for Jennings. Then let Jennings walk and receive an "A" prospect for him from whatever team signs him.

 

The long-term cost is Jones for Jennings, as the prospect value washes out. I like Marmol, but he is not going to get his shot in Chicago again.

 

How is that? Jones is the centerpiece of the deal, not Marmol. Marmol has the value of a young, strong armed, & lacks control reliever.

 

Replacing Jones will be more difficult than replacing Marmol. This is where I wish the Cubs would've let Soriano run the risk of becoming injured for the chance to play CF in Winter Ball (assuming that was an option on the team that he would've played on).

 

The signing of Soriano becomes reduced if Soriano replaces Jones and whichever CF'er they signed replaces Pierre. Or if they stick Soriano in CF, they still have to sign someone in the mold Trot Nixon, Cliff Floyd who will likely be a downgrade to Jones especially from a health standpoint.

 

The Cubs need another LH'ed bat in the line-up and they can never have enough pop. That is before Jones would be traded.

 

If they can't trade an area of surplus for an area of need they shouldn't be trading. They definitely shouldn't be replacing one area of need for another, especially when there is more pitching avail. via FA rather than productive and healthy LH'ed hitting OF'ers.

[Danny82]

Why do they need another LH bat in the line-up?

[Soul]

Why do they need another LH bat in the line-up?

 

Hendry keeps saying they do, yet he is hot to trade Jones. This is what confuses me.

 

My best guess is, Jones has asked to be traded and they just aren't making that fact public.

[UK1679666180]

Why do they need another LH bat in the line-up?

 

The Cubs or Colorado?

 

For the Cubs, you trade Jones and you're left with?

 

Colorado needs a CF'er more than anything, Sullivan is a 4th OF'er starting for the Rockies.

[E.J.]

Why do they need another LH bat in the line-up?

 

Hendry keeps saying they do, yet he is hot to trade Jones. This is what confuses me.

 

My best guess is, Jones has asked to be traded and they just aren't making that fact public.

 

Ben Maller[/url]"]Casual interest in Jason Jennings has graduated to concrete proposals with the Rockies considering a three-way trade with the Cubs and Pirates involving young pitchers and outfielders Jacque Jones and Brad Hawpe. The Cubs offered Jones, who formally requested a trade at season's end, and pitcher Carlos Marmol or Angel Guzman for the Rockies' opening-day starter. Under one scenario, the Rockies, who prefer Marmol, would keep Jones and ship Hawpe to the Pirates for starter Paul Maholm. ... Jennings' situation remains fluid. The Astros - Taylor Buchholz likely would be requested by the Rockies, with outfielder Chris Burke unavailable - and Rangers (reliever C.J. Wilson is attractive) are in the mix.

[goonys evil twin]

Why do they need another LH bat in the line-up?

 

Hendry keeps saying they do, yet he is hot to trade Jones. This is what confuses me.

 

My best guess is, Jones has asked to be traded and they just aren't making that fact public.

 

Well, I'm not one to harp on the need for LH bats, but the Cubs could use one, and definitely will if Jones is dealt. The Cubs were actually much worse against LHP last year than RHP, so in actuality, better RH hitters should make them better. The Cubs had, by far, the lowest OPS against LHP in the NL last year, while they were middle of the pack against RHP. But they are so extremely RH dominant right now, it's kind of scary. Jones and Izturis are the only guys who will bat LH vs RHP, and Izturis doesn't even qualify as a hitter. Last year they had Pierre (while bad, is better than Cesar) and Walker, to go along with Jones to start the season.

[Danny82]

Why do they need another LH bat in the line-up?

 

The Cubs or Colorado?

 

For the Cubs, you trade Jones and you're left with?

 

Colorado needs a CF'er more than anything, Sullivan is a 4th OF'er starting for the Rockies.

 

The Cubs. Honestly, who cares what side of the plate his replacement hits from as long as he can hit? This whole "need a few lefties to break up a run of right handed hitters" is an outdated notion as far as I am concerned. If the batter can hit, he can hit, regardless of what side of the plate he is doing that hitting from.

[Soul]

Why do they need another LH bat in the line-up?

 

Hendry keeps saying they do, yet he is hot to trade Jones. This is what confuses me.

 

My best guess is, Jones has asked to be traded and they just aren't making that fact public.

 

Ben Maller[/url]"]Casual interest in Jason Jennings has graduated to concrete proposals with the Rockies considering a three-way trade with the Cubs and Pirates involving young pitchers and outfielders Jacque Jones and Brad Hawpe. The Cubs offered Jones, who formally requested a trade at season's end, and pitcher Carlos Marmol or Angel Guzman for the Rockies' opening-day starter. Under one scenario, the Rockies, who prefer Marmol, would keep Jones and ship Hawpe to the Pirates for starter Paul Maholm. ... Jennings' situation remains fluid. The Astros - Taylor Buchholz likely would be requested by the Rockies, with outfielder Chris Burke unavailable - and Rangers (reliever C.J. Wilson is attractive) are in the mix.

 

Ahhh. Was it always known that Jacque wanted a trade, or is this new?

 

Either way, that makes sense. Hendry's got to look elsewhere for LH hitting. Not sure where he will find it.

[CubinNY]

Why do they need another LH bat in the line-up?

 

Hendry keeps saying they do, yet he is hot to trade Jones. This is what confuses me.

 

My best guess is, Jones has asked to be traded and they just aren't making that fact public.

 

Ben Maller[/url]"]Casual interest in Jason Jennings has graduated to concrete proposals with the Rockies considering a three-way trade with the Cubs and Pirates involving young pitchers and outfielders Jacque Jones and Brad Hawpe. The Cubs offered Jones, who formally requested a trade at season's end, and pitcher Carlos Marmol or Angel Guzman for the Rockies' opening-day starter. Under one scenario, the Rockies, who prefer Marmol, would keep Jones and ship Hawpe to the Pirates for starter Paul Maholm. ... Jennings' situation remains fluid. The Astros - Taylor Buchholz likely would be requested by the Rockies, with outfielder Chris Burke unavailable - and Rangers (reliever C.J. Wilson is attractive) are in the mix.

 

Ahhh. Was it always known that Jacque wanted a trade, or is this new?

 

Either way, that makes sense. Hendry's got to look elsewhere for LH hitting. Not sure where he will find it.

 

[can of worms] Adam Dunn [/can of worms]

[NoDak]

I have a couple of problems with this deal.

 

1. I think we could get more for Jones. His contract, while decried by many as an albatross last year now looks like bargain basement pricing. Obviously, I don't think he will bring us Pujols, but I think it should give more than Jennings.

 

2. Suddenly we move from needing 2 starting pitchers to needing a starting pitcher and a corner outfielder. If we trade Jones who takes the CF spot. From what I understand the Cubs don't think that Pie is ready and I don't know who else will be playing out their. Pagan?

 

That being said, I have to admit that I, like many cubs fans, do tend to overrate the cubs prospects. It is a well made point that we should trade players like Marmol et al rather than hoarding them on the off chance that they suddenly become dominant.

 

Sometimes we have to be willing to risk losing big to have the chance to "win" big. Otherwise, all trades become "lateral moves."

[ctcf]

Why do they need another LH bat in the line-up?

 

Hendry keeps saying they do, yet he is hot to trade Jones. This is what confuses me.

 

My best guess is, Jones has asked to be traded and they just aren't making that fact public.

 

Ben Maller[/url]"]Casual interest in Jason Jennings has graduated to concrete proposals with the Rockies considering a three-way trade with the Cubs and Pirates involving young pitchers and outfielders Jacque Jones and Brad Hawpe. The Cubs offered Jones, who formally requested a trade at season's end, and pitcher Carlos Marmol or Angel Guzman for the Rockies' opening-day starter. Under one scenario, the Rockies, who prefer Marmol, would keep Jones and ship Hawpe to the Pirates for starter Paul Maholm. ... Jennings' situation remains fluid. The Astros - Taylor Buchholz likely would be requested by the Rockies, with outfielder Chris Burke unavailable - and Rangers (reliever C.J. Wilson is attractive) are in the mix.

 

Ahhh. Was it always known that Jacque wanted a trade, or is this new?

 

Either way, that makes sense. Hendry's got to look elsewhere for LH hitting. Not sure where he will find it.

 

[can of worms] Adam Dunn [/can of worms]

 

NOOOOOOO

[goonys evil twin]

Ahhh. Was it always known that Jacque wanted a trade, or is this new?

 

Either way, that makes sense. Hendry's got to look elsewhere for LH hitting. Not sure where he will find it.

 

I think it was hinted/speculated by many that Jones wanted to be dealt, but I'm not sure it was ever talked about as a formal request.

 

I could see Hendry dealing Jones and then acquiring Floyd and Lofton, and patting himself on the back.

[RynoRules]

I am not sure I blame Jacque based on what some fans reportedly said to him during the year.

[UK1679666180]

There will be times when they're going to face pitchers that are definitely tougher on RH'ers than LH'ers. This will happen later in games when situational pitchers come into play. There are enough starting pitchers that are so dominant vs. RH'ers that a LH'er (even a mediocre hitter) likely becomes more effective than the best RH'ed hitter on the team.

 

Matt Clement when he was with the Cubs would be an example of the type of RH'er that would dominate RH'ed hitter, he was extremely difficult to pick up the ball from as well as his slider being a 65.

 

As far as relievers, it could be similar to Clement or as extreme as a side armer. The toughest I seen on righties over the 10 years was Kim when he was out of the pne for AZ.

[Danny82]

There will be times when they're going to face pitchers that are definitely tougher on RH'ers than LH'ers. This will happen later in games when situational pitchers come into play. There are enough starting pitchers that are so dominant vs. RH'ers that a LH'er (even a mediocre hitter) likely becomes more effective than the best RH'ed hitter on the team.

 

Matt Clement when he was with the Cubs would be an example of the type of RH'er that would dominate RH'ed hitter, he was extremely difficult to pick up the ball from as well as his slider being a 65.

 

As far as relievers, it could be similar to Clement or as extreme as a side armer. The toughest I seen on righties over the 10 years was Kim when he was out of the pne for AZ.

 

Yeah, but how many times are the Cubs going to face those kinds of pitchers? For all of those countless other times that they face a normal pitcher, isn't the added benefit of having a better hitter (over having a lesser hitter who hits left handed) going to pay off more over the course of the season? Isn't having a lefty hitter in the lineup for the sake of having a lefty in the lineup sort of like making policy decisions based on the exception rather than the rule?