Re: Peavy High on Cubs Wish List

[17 Seconds]

Here's just another reason why I can't buy what Levine is selling

 

From Churchill-

 

 

Mike said Tuesday there's no active conversation and that it was all left in SD's court last month. Since then, I find it hard to believe that one member of the media has the inside info on it and that Rosenthal, Olney, Heyman, and the beat guy from each city haven't picked up a single thing.

 

While I agree with what he's saying, and while I don't believe Levine, I'd believe what Levine had to say every single time over Olney.

 

I don't get what Olney has to do with any of this.

 

Did you not read the whole e-mail? He says it's hard to believe that Levine would have info over "Rosenthal, Olney, Heyman, and the beat guy from each city." While I agree that I don't think Levine has any info here, if Levine came out with a report that no one else had, or Olney came out with a report that no one else had, I'd believe Levine every time over guys like Olney. Just because Levine isn't a "big time" ESPN guy doesn't mean he can't have info.

 

When is the last time that Churchill ever got a scoop over any of the above mentioned?

 

When did He or I ever say he did? He hears thing from a friend (who has been discussed here before) who is really reliable. Now, whether or not the friend is telling him exatly what is really going on is another story, but the definitely he gets stuff from re: The Cubs is definitely above any of those guys. He only gets bits and pieces though.

 

By the way, he told me about a pretty big trade a few hours prior to when it broke anywhere else.

 

Anyways I don't really seeing the point in your post. What are you trying to say? Churchill never claimed to be a reporter and never claimed to break anything. He tells me stuff because I ask. I don't really get your comment. It's like you don't like what he told me, so you're trying to find ways to discredit him when he hasn't really been credited with anything in the first place.

[17 Seconds]

Here's just another reason why I can't buy what Levine is selling

 

From Churchill-

 

 

Mike said Tuesday there's no active conversation and that it was all left in SD's court last month. Since then, I find it hard to believe that one member of the media has the inside info on it and that Rosenthal, Olney, Heyman, and the beat guy from each city haven't picked up a single thing.

 

While I agree with what he's saying, and while I don't believe Levine, I'd believe what Levine had to say every single time over Olney.

 

I don't get what Olney has to do with any of this.

 

Did you not read the whole e-mail? He says it's hard to believe that Levine would have info over "Rosenthal, Olney, Heyman, and the beat guy from each city." While I agree that I don't think Levine has any info here, if Levine came out with a report that no one else had, or Olney came out with a report that no one else had, I'd believe Levine every time over guys like Olney. Just because Levine isn't a "big time" ESPN guy doesn't mean he can't have info.

 

No I read the whole e-mail, I just think you're putting too much into what he said. He wasn't even saying Olney was more reliable or better than Levine. Olney was just an example and probably just a name that came to his mind. His point was if what Levine is saying is true, SOMEBODY else would have picked up on it by now. He's not saying Olney specifically would have picked up on it by now, he's saying that at least one of the hundred of guys who cover this stuff would have heard about it by now if Levine has.

[CUBZ99]

Here's just another reason why I can't buy what Levine is selling

 

From Churchill-

 

 

Mike said Tuesday there's no active conversation and that it was all left in SD's court last month. Since then, I find it hard to believe that one member of the media has the inside info on it and that Rosenthal, Olney, Heyman, and the beat guy from each city haven't picked up a single thing.

 

While I agree with what he's saying, and while I don't believe Levine, I'd believe what Levine had to say every single time over Olney.

 

I don't get what Olney has to do with any of this.

 

Did you not read the whole e-mail? He says it's hard to believe that Levine would have info over "Rosenthal, Olney, Heyman, and the beat guy from each city." While I agree that I don't think Levine has any info here, if Levine came out with a report that no one else had, or Olney came out with a report that no one else had, I'd believe Levine every time over guys like Olney. Just because Levine isn't a "big time" ESPN guy doesn't mean he can't have info.

 

When is the last time that Churchill ever got a scoop over any of the above mentioned?

 

When did He or I ever say he did? He hears thing from a friend (who has been discussed here before) who is really reliable. Now, whether or not the friend is telling him exatly what is really going on is another story, but the definitely he gets stuff from re: The Cubs is definitely above any of those guys. He only gets bits and pieces though.

 

By the way, he told me about a pretty big trade a few hours prior to when it broke anywhere else.

 

Anyways I don't really seeing the point in your post. What are you trying to say? Churchill never claimed to be a reporter and never claimed to break anything. He tells me stuff because I ask. I don't really get your comment. It's like you don't like what he told me, so you're trying to find ways to discredit him when he hasn't really been credited with anything in the first place.

 

Your quoting him like he is an authority. Levine > Chruchill any day of the week. We get it already, you don't believe Levine. Nobody will really know until things settle down, but to quote Chruchill, we might as well quote Banedon.

[17 Seconds]

Here's just another reason why I can't buy what Levine is selling

 

From Churchill-

 

 

Mike said Tuesday there's no active conversation and that it was all left in SD's court last month. Since then, I find it hard to believe that one member of the media has the inside info on it and that Rosenthal, Olney, Heyman, and the beat guy from each city haven't picked up a single thing.

 

While I agree with what he's saying, and while I don't believe Levine, I'd believe what Levine had to say every single time over Olney.

 

I don't get what Olney has to do with any of this.

 

Did you not read the whole e-mail? He says it's hard to believe that Levine would have info over "Rosenthal, Olney, Heyman, and the beat guy from each city." While I agree that I don't think Levine has any info here, if Levine came out with a report that no one else had, or Olney came out with a report that no one else had, I'd believe Levine every time over guys like Olney. Just because Levine isn't a "big time" ESPN guy doesn't mean he can't have info.

 

When is the last time that Churchill ever got a scoop over any of the above mentioned?

 

When did He or I ever say he did? He hears thing from a friend (who has been discussed here before) who is really reliable. Now, whether or not the friend is telling him exatly what is really going on is another story, but the definitely he gets stuff from re: The Cubs is definitely above any of those guys. He only gets bits and pieces though.

 

By the way, he told me about a pretty big trade a few hours prior to when it broke anywhere else.

 

Anyways I don't really seeing the point in your post. What are you trying to say? Churchill never claimed to be a reporter and never claimed to break anything. He tells me stuff because I ask. I don't really get your comment. It's like you don't like what he told me, so you're trying to find ways to discredit him when he hasn't really been credited with anything in the first place.

 

Your quoting him like he is an authority. Levine > Chruchill any day of the week. We get it already, you don't believe Levine. Nobody will really know until things settle down, but to quote Chruchill, we might as well quote Banedon.

 

Huh? Please explain how I quoted him as an authority. I even said right in the post that it's just another example of why I don't buy into Levine.

 

If you can show me where I said "Churchill said this so it's pretty much a lock", then I'll admit I was "quoting him like an authority".

 

Again, you're just mad because he said something you didn't like so you're trying to deiscredit him when I only casually mention what he says in the first place.

[Butterscup1679666578]

Here's just another reason why I can't buy what Levine is selling

 

From Churchill-

 

 

Mike said Tuesday there's no active conversation and that it was all left in SD's court last month. Since then, I find it hard to believe that one member of the media has the inside info on it and that Rosenthal, Olney, Heyman, and the beat guy from each city haven't picked up a single thing.

 

While I agree with what he's saying, and while I don't believe Levine, I'd believe what Levine had to say every single time over Olney.

 

I don't get what Olney has to do with any of this.

 

Did you not read the whole e-mail? He says it's hard to believe that Levine would have info over "Rosenthal, Olney, Heyman, and the beat guy from each city." While I agree that I don't think Levine has any info here, if Levine came out with a report that no one else had, or Olney came out with a report that no one else had, I'd believe Levine every time over guys like Olney. Just because Levine isn't a "big time" ESPN guy doesn't mean he can't have info.

 

No I read the whole e-mail, I just think you're putting too much into what he said. He wasn't even saying Olney was more reliable or better than Levine. Olney was just an example and probably just a name that came to his mind. His point was if what Levine is saying is true, SOMEBODY else would have picked up on it by now. He's not saying Olney specifically would have picked up on it by now, he's saying that at least one of the hundred of guys who cover this stuff would have heard about it by now if Levine has.

 

You're right, I probably am reading too much into it.

[17 Seconds]

But you're right, I'd believe Levine over Olney too if the situation presented itself

[cubsfan26]

Bruce Levine gets alot of his information from major league scouts. I'm sure he also has some connections with Cubs front office people. So what I think is going on, either the Cubs scouts or front office people are telling Levine, that they still think they can get a Peavy deal done at some point. The prospects mentions are probably guys the Padres like, and might want in a deal(I'm sure it won't be the final package). But I don't think the Cubs and Padres are having any current talks about Peavy. But once a new owner is in place, and if he's willing to give them the ok to go after Peavy(Levine seems confident this would happen). Then I think the Cubs will restart the Peavy talks with the Padres. Until then I would expect the Peavy talks to be dead. But I would never say it's over until Hendry starts trading some of his spare parts away. Right now it looks like he has something planned with Pie, Cedeno, Wuertz/Hart not really having spots on the roster(not mention a open spot in the rotation). Mix that with Vitters, Stevens, Castillo and getting a third team involved, something might happen

[Soul]

Maybe at the deadline then.

[Banedon]

Your quoting him like he is an authority. Levine > Chruchill any day of the week. We get it already, you don't believe Levine. Nobody will really know until things settle down, but to quote Chruchill, we might as well quote Banedon.

 

Was I just used as an insult?

[Soul]

Your quoting him like he is an authority. Levine > Chruchill any day of the week. We get it already, you don't believe Levine. Nobody will really know until things settle down, but to quote Chruchill, we might as well quote Banedon.

 

Was I just used as an insult?

 

Yeap. Looks that way :thumbsup:

[badger1679666666]

Can anyone give me a 2-3 sentence summary of the last 157 pages?

[Clem Fandango]

Can anyone give me a 2-3 sentence summary of the last 157 pages?

 

- They talked about a deal

- Came close

- Hendry backed out, saying it was too much

- Deal pronounced dead/on life support

- Levine upgraded it to alive, despite every other journalist on the planet, living or dead, saying that there have been no talks whatsoever

- Towers said there have been no discussions and reports say the trade of DeRosa was not to acquire pitching for a Peavy deal like people assumed, but to clear payroll for Bradley

- No real news since. Talk and debate ever since.

[Blue W]

The Logan,

 

That's an amazingly accurate synopsis. Do you work for Cliff Notes by any chance? Can I get a 5-6 sentence summary of War and Peace, or beter yet, the Brian Roberts Thread? Nice work.

[RammyFanny]

The Logan,

 

That's an amazingly accurate synopsis. Do you work for Cliff Notes by any chance? Can I get a 5-6 sentence summary of War and Peace, or beter yet, the Brian Roberts Thread? Nice work.

I hear the author of that Brian Roberts thread (cough cough) is a legend in the making.

[cubswin2009]

David Kaplan on CTL said he believes the 3 prospects the Cubs got in the DeRosa deal are enough to land Peavy and he thinks they are just waiting for the new owner to sign off on it.

[Post Count Padder]

David Kaplan on CTL said he believes the 3 prospects the Cubs got in the DeRosa deal are enough to land Peavy and he thinks they are just waiting for the new owner to sign off on it.

He and Levine keep pushing this and no one else is hearing anything remotely close to this. I want to have hope, but I highly doubt this is getting done.

[17 Seconds]

David Kaplan on CTL said he believes the 3 prospects the Cubs got in the DeRosa deal are enough to land Peavy and he thinks they are just waiting for the new owner to sign off on it.

 

just his speculation.

[PrimeTime]

When is the new ownership to be announced?

[cubsfan26]

I agree, but Bruce Levine has mentioned the same thing. I wouldn't be surprised if the Cubs feel they can make a Peavy deal, if the new owner signs off on it. Putting Stevens(maybe one of the other prospects) in the deal might allow them not to have to trade Marshall or Guzman. But I still think we would have to get a third team to ship Pie to for a SP. There's no current talks going on but, I think the Cubs feel they can still get Peavy.

[Cubswin11]

When is the new ownership to be announced?

I think Levine said the other day it will be announced/known no later than early February but possibly the end of January.

[Roast]

The Logan,

 

That's an amazingly accurate synopsis. Do you work for Cliff Notes by any chance? Can I get a 5-6 sentence summary of War and Peace, or beter yet, the Brian Roberts Thread? Nice work.

I can do the last one:

 

Hundreds of pages of nonsense.

[Clem Fandango]

The Logan,

 

That's an amazingly accurate synopsis. Do you work for Cliff Notes by any chance? Can I get a 5-6 sentence summary of War and Peace, or beter yet, the Brian Roberts Thread? Nice work.

I can do the last one:

 

Hundreds of pages of nonsense.

 

I knew I was forgetting something. Here's the Brian Roberts thread cliff notes...

 

- The Cubs traded for Brian Roberts

- Discussion for a zillion pages, mostly about how Khalil Greene is God incarnate

- Psyche

[shnsajax]

The Logan,

 

That's an amazingly accurate synopsis. Do you work for Cliff Notes by any chance? Can I get a 5-6 sentence summary of War and Peace, or beter yet, the Brian Roberts Thread? Nice work.

I can do the last one:

 

Hundreds of pages of nonsense.

 

I knew I was forgetting something. Here's the Brian Roberts thread cliff notes...

 

- The Cubs traded for Brian Roberts

- Discussion for a zillion pages, mostly about how Khalil Greene is God incarnate

- Psyche

 

You forgot about Bigbird.

[CubFanPhilly]

Assume Bradley's deal isn't backloaded and the Marquis deal happens with Vizcaino remaining in the pen. Payroll stands at about $141 mil. before adding Peavy. New ownership would have to approve a budget of ~$150 mil. or Hendry would have to move more payroll in order to fit Peavy (Gaudin, Gregg, Vicaino?). 2010 payroll would be $148 mil. before settling Soto's first arbitration year, before resigning/replacing Harden's spot in the rotation, and without filling 5-6 spots on the bench and BP.

 

I'm skeptical that Peavy is the direction Hendry is heading.

[17 Seconds]

The better Bruce posted this in the Aurilia thread

 

Peavy is not an option for now. The ownership situation will have to be resolved first. Hendry has had no serious talks with SD lately, but he will continue keeping an eye on the situation. Until then, I fully expect the Cubs to obtain another starting pitcher.