Re: Peavy High on Cubs Wish List

[PrimeTime]

I agree that Marshall is very valuable since its 99.9 percent sure Harden or some pitcher with miss starts with a injury or setback which is normal in a 162 game season..He is a great fill-in..If were dumping Marquis,we are sure going to need him or someone else who will accept being a starter or long bullpen guy like Angel Guzman or whoever else that can fufill that role..Fontenot not so much since we have the flexibilty at those positions..I seriosuly wouldn't mind Fontenot at SS with his doubles and long ball power and the fact that he couldnt be worse that Theriot's arm and range at the SS position..If we can give them Vitters instead of Marshall that is fine with me since Vitters won't be here for a while since we have A-Ram here.Vitters has the talent and will be great, but it's all about winning now.Who knows,he could be another CPatt or Pie,but if its worth getting a caliber player like Peavy,you have to pull the trigger on whatever it takes.All I want is getting Peavy, a lefty RF ( Abreu/Ibanez/Dunn etc.) and having that 6th pitching spot filled with someone solid because we know someone will be hurt or miss some starts,and then platooning SS with Theriot and Fontenot would also be fine..

[Clem Fandango]

How do you not see the difference?

 

I hear ya now. No worries. Was just confused by your wording on the topic and was not quite sure what you meant by it.

[Banedon]

I don't have the energy for this to turn into another Roberts thread. I just don't.

[chopsx9]

Lots of payroll flex if we lose Lee and Marquis. Dunn at first?

 

If he'd go for it, I'd be in favor.

 

This is where a guy like DeRosa becomes even more valuable. With his versatility, you can sign an OF and keep him to 2nd, or do something like sign Furcal at SS, move Riot to 2B and DeRo to the OF, or if you trade Lee, you can put DeRo at first and upgrade in other places. Wost case scenario, you can start Fontenot at 2B and move DeRo to RF. It's a nice problem to have and you're not handcuffed to find help at any one position. You can upgrade pretty much anywhere and put DeRo in to fix just about any hole.

 

Watching Dunn attempt to stretch and dig any ball out of the dirt would be hilarious.

There was a scout quoted in ESPN last year that said Dunn was incapable of playing 1B. He`s certainly bad enough in the outfield that if there was any chance he could play 1B, he`d be there already.

[JWCUB]

Cubs Still In On Peavy

By Tim Dierkes [December 1 at 10:35am CST]

Murray Chass snagged a good quote from Padres GM Kevin Towers regarding the Jake Peavy trade talks:

 

"I would say the Cubs are still in it. Lou said they’re not in it, but their general manager says they’re in it. The Dodgers have bigger fish to fry. That’s not to say they might not circle back later in the winter. Our primary goal is to trade Peavy."

 

One Cubs source spoke of a "two-year window to win," according to Dave van Dyck of the Chicago Tribune. Chass quotes Towers as seeking established players back for Peavy, which is why the Cubs would need to get a third team involved. Van Dyck says the Cubs hope to hang on to Mike Fontenot and Sean Marshall.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

[Post Count Padder]

Cubs Still In On Peavy

By Tim Dierkes [December 1 at 10:35am CST]

Murray Chass snagged a good quote from Padres GM Kevin Towers regarding the Jake Peavy trade talks:

 

"I would say the Cubs are still in it. Lou said they’re not in it, but their general manager says they’re in it. The Dodgers have bigger fish to fry. That’s not to say they might not circle back later in the winter. Our primary goal is to trade Peavy."

 

One Cubs source spoke of a "two-year window to win," according to Dave van Dyck of the Chicago Tribune. Chass quotes Towers as seeking established players back for Peavy, which is why the Cubs would need to get a third team involved. Van Dyck says the Cubs hope to hang on to Mike Fontenot and Sean Marshall.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

Nothing new

[cubsfan26]

Cubs Still In On Peavy

By Tim Dierkes [December 1 at 10:35am CST]

Murray Chass snagged a good quote from Padres GM Kevin Towers regarding the Jake Peavy trade talks:

 

"I would say the Cubs are still in it. Lou said they’re not in it, but their general manager says they’re in it. The Dodgers have bigger fish to fry. That’s not to say they might not circle back later in the winter. Our primary goal is to trade Peavy."

 

One Cubs source spoke of a "two-year window to win," according to Dave van Dyck of the Chicago Tribune. Chass quotes Towers as seeking established players back for Peavy, which is why the Cubs would need to get a third team involved. Van Dyck says the Cubs hope to hang on to Mike Fontenot and Sean Marshall.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

 

 

Yeah when Towers pretty much said the Cubs are still in on Peavy, I didn't believe Lou comments. Who knows maybe Hendry is keeping Lou out of the loop more this offseason, compared to other years. Lou keeps talking about adding LH hitting, but there hasn't really been any serious rumors about the Cubs targetting one guy. Yet the Cubs are pretty much the only team in the Peavy talks right now. If the Dodgers get in on the Peavy talks we could have a problem though, since Peavy did say that the Dodgers were his first choice. But I doubt Towers would wanna trade him within the division, and if he did the asking price would be much higher.

[CUBZ99]

Cubs Still In On Peavy

By Tim Dierkes [December 1 at 10:35am CST]

Murray Chass snagged a good quote from Padres GM Kevin Towers regarding the Jake Peavy trade talks:

 

"I would say the Cubs are still in it. Lou said they’re not in it, but their general manager says they’re in it. The Dodgers have bigger fish to fry. That’s not to say they might not circle back later in the winter. Our primary goal is to trade Peavy."

 

One Cubs source spoke of a "two-year window to win," according to Dave van Dyck of the Chicago Tribune. Chass quotes Towers as seeking established players back for Peavy, which is why the Cubs would need to get a third team involved. Van Dyck says the Cubs hope to hang on to Mike Fontenot and Sean Marshall.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

 

 

Yeah when Towers pretty much said the Cubs are still in on Peavy, I didn't believe Lou comments. Who knows maybe Hendry is keeping Lou out of the loop more this offseason, compared to other years. Lou keeps talking about adding LH hitting, but there hasn't really been any serious rumors about the Cubs targetting one guy. Yet the Cubs are pretty much the only team in the Peavy talks right now. If the Dodgers get in on the Peavy talks we could have a problem though, since Peavy did say that the Dodgers were his first choice. But I doubt Towers would wanna trade him within the division, and if he did the asking price would be much higher.

 

I'm guessing that Lou is completely in the loop. It is all a negotiations game. Lou is probably taking cues from Hendry and talking down the trade in order to make the Cubs look less desperate to get Peavy. The comments also take the pressure off Hendry, in that it lowers expectations.

[The Other 15]

Oh, man that LH bat would be HUGE! Paying someone like Abreau or Ibanez close to $20 mil annually would guarantee that no one fills up their pants when playoff pressure is here? Having the most productive offense from 1-9 is no match for adding poor defense to help that already good production.

 

This missing link LH hitter myth that Lou sparked is spreading like a wild fire. I find myself wondering how having a LH hitter batting third would make such a huge difference when no one gets on base before or after he bats during the playoffs? Maybe 3 playoff games against the Dodgers is proof that no one will hit or produce in future playoffs?

[cubsfan26]

Oh, man that LH bat would be HUGE! Paying someone like Abreau or Ibanez close to $20 mil annually would guarantee that no one fills up their pants when playoff pressure is here?

 

There's no way Abreu or Ibanez get anything close to 20m annually. The Cubs will probably try to offer them both somewere between 9-11m per season at 2 or 3 years tops.

 

 

This missing link LH hitter myth that Lou sparked is spreading like a wild fire. I find myself wondering how having a LH hitter batting third would make such a huge difference when no one gets on base before or after he bats during the playoffs? Maybe 3 playoff games against the Dodgers is proof that no one will hit or produce in future playoffs?

 

How about 3 games against the D-backs in 2007, plus 3 games against the Dodgers in 2008. Watching the Cubs AB's in 2008 was looking watching a reply of 2007. There's a problem here, and it won't just go away. In 5 playoff games in the last two years against RH pitching the Cubs haven't scored more then 2 runs in a game. History tells us that it's very hard to win a World Series without productive LH or switch hitter in your line-up.

 

 

Having a balanced RH/LH line-up makes it tougher for a pitcher to excute his pitches and makes him less likely to get in a groove. The Cubs offense was one of the best in baseball last year number wise, but that doesn't mean it didn't have flaws. Yes we pounded the Pirates and other bad pitching, but how did we hit against the Dodgers or even Phililes starters in the regular season? In 2007 we pounded the bad pitchers less, but still had the same issues against the D-backs pitching in the regular season as we did in the postseason. Adding a productive LH bat, won't solve all our problems, but it could help.

[biittner77]

I'm guessing that Lou is completely in the loop. It is all a negotiations game. Lou is probably taking cues from Hendry and talking down the trade in order to make the Cubs look less desperate to get Peavy. The comments also take the pressure off Hendry, in that it lowers expectations.

 

That makes sense but Hendry has always prided himself on being a "straight shooter "(even to a fault). When he wants a player he's typically pretty transparent about it. I think this is more the sort of thing the manager is supposed to say in case the trade doesn't go through.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I was convinced about the LH-hitter theory after the playoffs, too, but I think the statistical evidence is pretty clear against it, unless you believe that you only need one in the playoffs and not against good RHers in the regular season.

[CubinNY]

NSBB really needs a FRA (frequently refuted arguments) stickied thread.

 

1. good pitching is good because it is more likely to get out hitters at a faster rate than bad pitching. It doesn't matter who the team is. That's why it is defined as "good".

 

2. What side of the plate one stands on is of lessor (read, no) importance than his OPS.

[JWCUB]

8:42pm: Towers gave Tom Krasovic a Peavy update. Towers believes that the Braves' unwillingness to grant Peavy a no-trade clause remains on obstacle in that potential match. Plus, a Krasovic source wonders whether Peavy would even OK a trade to Atlanta.

 

Krasovic adds that the Cubs and Padres discussed a 5-for-1 deal, where the Orioles would be involved to route more pitching to San Diego. However, Towers noted the Cubs' current payroll concerns.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

 

 

Is money the only thing holding this up?

[UMFan83]

Money is probably the biggest thing holding it up, but not the only thing.

[Clem Fandango]

Well what would make next year's team better than this past year's team? An ace pitcher or a mid-level skilled left handed right fielder who will probably cost similar amounts of money in 2009?

 

What would be a better team...

 

Soriano LF

Theriot SS

Lee 1B

Ramirez 3B

DeRosa RF

Soto C

Fukudome/Johnson CF

Fontenot 2B

 

Peavy/Z/Harden/Dempster/Lilly

 

Or...

 

Soriano LF

Theriot/Fontenot SS

Lee 1B

Ramirez 3B

Ibanez or Abreu or other LH bat for RF

DeRosa/Fontenot 2B

Soto C

Fukudome/Johnson CF

 

Z/Harden/Dempster/Lilly/Marquis or Marshall?

 

Not posing this as a rhetorical question, just wondering what others would want. Personally I'd rather have the first option, all things considered (trade pieces given, increase in payroll, etc).

 

Here's a question, which player would generate a better revenue stream for the Cubs... Peavy or someone like Ibanez or Abreu or whoever else we're targeting for RF? I think at least with Peavy the Cubs would make a heck of a lot more money on merchandising than the other options, granted it probably wouldn't be a huge amount, but it'd be significant compared between the two

[cubsfan26]

Money is probably the biggest thing holding it up, but not the only thing.

 

 

If we can find a team to take on Marquis at 6-7m, then trading for Peavy becomes much easier for the Cubs. They might also have to trade Gaudin(would have to get a cheaper reliever in return) and Cotts to clear 3-4m to add a RF. When you factor in that they will probably have to sign a free agent if most of their good prospects are traded for Peavy. The Padres need to deal Peavy, and at some point I think they will agree on some type of middle ground three way type of deal, if the Cubs can fit him in their budget.

[davearm2]

Well what would make next year's team better than this past year's team? An ace pitcher or a mid-level skilled left handed right fielder who will probably cost similar amounts of money in 2009?

 

What would be a better team...

 

Soriano LF

Theriot SS

Lee 1B

Ramirez 3B

DeRosa RF

Soto C

Fukudome/Johnson CF

Fontenot 2B

 

Peavy/Z/Harden/Dempster/Lilly

 

Or...

 

Soriano LF

Theriot/Fontenot SS

Lee 1B

Ramirez 3B

Ibanez or Abreu or other LH bat for RF

DeRosa/Fontenot 2B

Soto C

Fukudome/Johnson CF

 

Z/Harden/Dempster/Lilly/Marquis or Marshall?

 

Not posing this as a rhetorical question, just wondering what others would want. Personally I'd rather have the first option, all things considered (trade pieces given, increase in payroll, etc).

 

Here's a question, which player would generate a better revenue stream for the Cubs... Peavy or someone like Ibanez or Abreu or whoever else we're targeting for RF? I think at least with Peavy the Cubs would make a heck of a lot more money on merchandising than the other options, granted it probably wouldn't be a huge amount, but it'd be significant compared between the two

I'd rather have the first.

 

There would be basically zero difference between the players in terms of merchandising revenue, or just about any other revenue. The only revenue difference would come if one guy delivered an additional postseason series or two.

[Rob]

Well what would make next year's team better than this past year's team? An ace pitcher or a mid-level skilled left handed right fielder who will probably cost similar amounts of money in 2009?

 

I still don't understand this board's fascination with guys like Dunn, Ibanez and Abreu in RF. For the price, I'd rather run Pie out in CF and Fukudome out in RF. I love offense as much as the next guy, but the available guys to "play" RF are absolute butchers out there... consistently among the most terrible fielders in the game. Pie ranks as one of the top defensive CF... the difference between him and those guys actually should get pretty close to covering for the bat, at a mere fraction of the price.

[muntjack]

I don't see how anyone would prefer the second scenario. With Milwaukee's rotation in flux, we have an excellent shot at making the playoffs as is. Once there, Peavy/Harden/Z/Dempster gives us the edge over any other rotation we might face. This is a no-brainer, really.

[Backtobanks]

I don't see how anyone would prefer the second scenario. With Milwaukee's rotation in flux, we have an excellent shot at making the playoffs as is. Once there, Peavy/Harden/Z/Dempster gives us the edge over any other rotation we might face. This is a no-brainer, really.

 

With that rotation, we would probably get swept 1-0, 2-1, 1-0. :grin:

[Jehrico]

In the playoffs, I don't think Peavey is that much of an upgrade compared to a good RF (if one can be had). In the playoffs, you're not upgrading from Marquis, as you only have a four man rotation. What you're doing is bumping either Demp or Lily for Peavey. I don't think getting Peavey is critical to making the playoffs next year, as were already a good bet to get back. I can understand why someone would prefer that we upgrade the OF first. That said, I believe you never pass on a rare talent like Peavey when you can get him on the cheap.

[Blue W]

I want Peavy more than a RFer. If we got him, I could handle Fuk in RF at least to start the season. I doubt he would be the difference between being in the hunt or not at the AS break. if he's playing badly at that time, we can make a trade at the deadline. The ownership question will be resolved by then and we mighthave alittle more flexibility. We also might be able to get a cheap rental, though I don't know who is a FA in 2010 who might fit that description. Either way, if the choice is Peavy or a RFer. I'm with Peavy all day.

[UMFan83]

Blah blah blah blah sample size, but I wish a team that is known for unclutch playoff performances wasn't trying to acquire a pitcher that has given up 19 ER in 15.2 playoff IP (including the 1 game playoff).

[anabiono]

Blah blah blah blah sample size, but I wish a team that is known for unclutch playoff performances wasn't trying to acquire a pitcher that has given up 19 ER in 15.2 playoff IP (including the 1 game playoff).

 

yep, it is concerning