Re: Peavy High on Cubs Wish List

[Cubswin11]

http://mlb.mlb.com/media/video.jsp?mid=200901263772514

 

this has probably been posted...I haven't seen it though so i thought I'd put it up

I have not seen that, interesting. Sounds more like that guy is just speculating and doesn't really have any source...

[UMFan83]

Can someone summarize what it says? I can't watch the video here at work.

[Cubswin11]

Can someone summarize what it says? I can't watch the video here at work.

It's a MLB.com national reporter Barry Bloom. He pretty much says everything the Cubs have been doing this offseason has set up a trade for Peavy and that as soon as Ricketts gives the high sign Hendry will get it done. He makes it seem like a deal is in place it's just a matter of time until it goes through. He doesn't name any players involved but sounds confident a deal is in place/will get done.

[cubswin2009]

No need to make Peavy commitment at this point

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/hayes/1397874,hayes-ricketts-cubs-012609.article

It’s always easier to spend someone else’s money, especially in these tough times. That’s what is amusing about sentiment that Tom Ricketts, the leading bidder to buy the Cubs, should agree to swallow Jake Peavy’s $63 million dollar contract to prove he’s committed to winning.

 

Isn’t shelling out $900 million — $200 million more than the previous record price for a baseball franchise — during a national economic meltdown commitment enough, especially when it will take hundreds of millions more to refurbish crumbling Wrigley Field?

 

The Cubs need another starting pitcher because the fifth spot in the rotation remains in flux and because Rich Harden’s right arm is held together with Silly String. The infatuation with Peavy, however, has become so great that some appear willing to deem the Cubs’ offseason a failure if the 2007 NL Cy Young winner isn’t acquired before pitchers and catchers report to spring training.

 

Even without Peavy, the Cubs have the best rotation in the NL Central and among the best in the National League heading into Cactus League play. Pitchers such as Braden Looper, Randy Wolf and Jon Garland offer more affordable alternatives without eliminating the possibility of acquiring Peavy at a later date if an extra All-Star caliber arm is needed.

[brinoch]

I really think acquiring Peavy is a no-brainer. That said, I'd be talking to Sheets, too. I think you can get a very nice deal with him because of his injury concerns. The bigger drawback with Sheets, in my opinion, is that he's a Type 'A' free agent.

[UMFan83]

I really think acquiring Peavy is a no-brainer. That said, I'd be talking to Sheets, too. I think you can get a very nice deal with him because of his injury concerns. The bigger drawback with Sheets, in my opinion, is that he's a Type 'A' free agent.

 

Sadly, gaining or losing draft picks because of a Type A FA doesn't seem to be much of a concern for Hendry.

[brinoch]

I really think acquiring Peavy is a no-brainer. That said, I'd be talking to Sheets, too. I think you can get a very nice deal with him because of his injury concerns. The bigger drawback with Sheets, in my opinion, is that he's a Type 'A' free agent.

 

Sadly, gaining or losing draft picks because of a Type A FA doesn't seem to be much of a concern for Hendry.

 

I know. It's frustrating.

[Mephistopheles]

not really...

[Jehrico]

I'd offer Sheets a one year contract with a modest player option for next year. If he doesn't throw much next year, he's got security for 2010. If he does, he can opt out and go for the bigger contract. If he does leave instead of resigning with us, we get the draft pick back (assuming he'd still be at least a type B after the 2009 season if he doesn't pitch much...). I don't see too many teams willing to offer him multiple years after how he ended the season.

[haubrich91]

I want to believe that video, but I just can't. I'll wait until it's official to start getting happy. He sounded so sure of himself, though.

[Soul]

I want to believe that video, but I just can't. I'll wait until it's official to start getting happy. He sounded so sure of himself, though.

 

You've got to believe that even if there was a deal in place, it will be re-evaluated in light of current economic developments, the new ownership, etc. etc.

[nolanwood]

No need to make Peavy commitment at this point

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/hayes/1397874,hayes-ricketts-cubs-012609.article

It’s always easier to spend someone else’s money, especially in these tough times. That’s what is amusing about sentiment that Tom Ricketts, the leading bidder to buy the Cubs, should agree to swallow Jake Peavy’s $63 million dollar contract to prove he’s committed to winning.

 

Isn’t shelling out $900 million — $200 million more than the previous record price for a baseball franchise — during a national economic meltdown commitment enough, especially when it will take hundreds of millions more to refurbish crumbling Wrigley Field?

 

The Cubs need another starting pitcher because the fifth spot in the rotation remains in flux and because Rich Harden’s right arm is held together with Silly String. The infatuation with Peavy, however, has become so great that some appear willing to deem the Cubs’ offseason a failure if the 2007 NL Cy Young winner isn’t acquired before pitchers and catchers report to spring training.

 

Even without Peavy, the Cubs have the best rotation in the NL Central and among the best in the National League heading into Cactus League play. Pitchers such as Braden Looper, Randy Wolf and Jon Garland offer more affordable alternatives without eliminating the possibility of acquiring Peavy at a later date if an extra All-Star caliber arm is needed.

 

What does the amount he paid have to do with his commitment to winning?

[Soul]

No need to make Peavy commitment at this point

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/hayes/1397874,hayes-ricketts-cubs-012609.article

It’s always easier to spend someone else’s money, especially in these tough times. That’s what is amusing about sentiment that Tom Ricketts, the leading bidder to buy the Cubs, should agree to swallow Jake Peavy’s $63 million dollar contract to prove he’s committed to winning.

 

Isn’t shelling out $900 million — $200 million more than the previous record price for a baseball franchise — during a national economic meltdown commitment enough, especially when it will take hundreds of millions more to refurbish crumbling Wrigley Field?

 

The Cubs need another starting pitcher because the fifth spot in the rotation remains in flux and because Rich Harden’s right arm is held together with Silly String. The infatuation with Peavy, however, has become so great that some appear willing to deem the Cubs’ offseason a failure if the 2007 NL Cy Young winner isn’t acquired before pitchers and catchers report to spring training.

 

Even without Peavy, the Cubs have the best rotation in the NL Central and among the best in the National League heading into Cactus League play. Pitchers such as Braden Looper, Randy Wolf and Jon Garland offer more affordable alternatives without eliminating the possibility of acquiring Peavy at a later date if an extra All-Star caliber arm is needed.

 

What does the amount he paid have to do with his commitment to winning?

 

Nothing. Too many people still equate size of payroll to commitment to winning. It's become kind of an outmoded idea, but one that lots of people still carry around. I guess watching lower payroll teams have success regularly just doesn't register.

[Old Style]

If it helps, I'll chip in $5 to help pay Peavy's salary.

[Jehrico]

No need to make Peavy commitment at this point

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/hayes/1397874,hayes-ricketts-cubs-012609.article

It’s always easier to spend someone else’s money, especially in these tough times. That’s what is amusing about sentiment that Tom Ricketts, the leading bidder to buy the Cubs, should agree to swallow Jake Peavy’s $63 million dollar contract to prove he’s committed to winning.

 

Isn’t shelling out $900 million — $200 million more than the previous record price for a baseball franchise — during a national economic meltdown commitment enough, especially when it will take hundreds of millions more to refurbish crumbling Wrigley Field?

 

The Cubs need another starting pitcher because the fifth spot in the rotation remains in flux and because Rich Harden’s right arm is held together with Silly String. The infatuation with Peavy, however, has become so great that some appear willing to deem the Cubs’ offseason a failure if the 2007 NL Cy Young winner isn’t acquired before pitchers and catchers report to spring training.

 

Even without Peavy, the Cubs have the best rotation in the NL Central and among the best in the National League heading into Cactus League play. Pitchers such as Braden Looper, Randy Wolf and Jon Garland offer more affordable alternatives without eliminating the possibility of acquiring Peavy at a later date if an extra All-Star caliber arm is needed.

 

What does the amount he paid have to do with his commitment to winning?

 

Nothing. Too many people still equate size of payroll to commitment to winning. It's become kind of an outmoded idea, but one that lots of people still carry around. I guess watching lower payroll teams have success regularly just doesn't register.

I think the sentiment has to do with the opposite scenario, where a lack of spending equates to a lack of committment. As far as our team goes, think of the 80s and 90s Cubs teams where the trib was making money hand over fist, yet they never would go after any high priced free agents, nor would they trade for any high-priced superstars. Nomar in 2004 was really the first time they went out after a premier player in a big trade, and Soriano was the first top-notch free agent they really pursued during the Tribs tenure.

[CubinNY]

No need to make Peavy commitment at this point

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/hayes/1397874,hayes-ricketts-cubs-012609.article

It’s always easier to spend someone else’s money, especially in these tough times. That’s what is amusing about sentiment that Tom Ricketts, the leading bidder to buy the Cubs, should agree to swallow Jake Peavy’s $63 million dollar contract to prove he’s committed to winning.

 

Isn’t shelling out $900 million — $200 million more than the previous record price for a baseball franchise — during a national economic meltdown commitment enough, especially when it will take hundreds of millions more to refurbish crumbling Wrigley Field?

 

The Cubs need another starting pitcher because the fifth spot in the rotation remains in flux and because Rich Harden’s right arm is held together with Silly String. The infatuation with Peavy, however, has become so great that some appear willing to deem the Cubs’ offseason a failure if the 2007 NL Cy Young winner isn’t acquired before pitchers and catchers report to spring training.

 

Even without Peavy, the Cubs have the best rotation in the NL Central and among the best in the National League heading into Cactus League play. Pitchers such as Braden Looper, Randy Wolf and Jon Garland offer more affordable alternatives without eliminating the possibility of acquiring Peavy at a later date if an extra All-Star caliber arm is needed.

 

What does the amount he paid have to do with his commitment to winning?

 

Nothing. Too many people still equate size of payroll to commitment to winning. It's become kind of an outmoded idea, but one that lots of people still carry around. I guess watching lower payroll teams have success regularly just doesn't register.

I think the sentiment has to do with the opposite scenario, where a lack of spending equates to a lack of committment. As far as our team goes, think of the 80s and 90s Cubs teams where the trib was making money hand over fist, yet they never would go after any high priced free agents, nor would they trade for any high-priced superstars. Nomar in 2004 was really the first time they went out after a premier player in a big trade, and Soriano was the first top-notch free agent they really pursued during the Tribs tenure.

That's not necessarily true. Sandberg was the highest paid player in baseball for a time and Sosa was given a huge contract. That was kind of the issue, they would pay for one big celeb and surround him with caca while marketing "the Wrigley Experience".

[mdwilla]

I still think a two year deal around 9 per is a steal for sheets if you can get protection based on inngs pitched. No need to tie up more money long term in Peavy. The Cubs keep Marshall,Hart,Stevens,Olson as rotation depth/trade. Harden is already hurt. Zambrano is coming off a season with shoulder issues.

[RedFlash]

I still think a two year deal around 9 per is a steal for sheets if you can get protection based on inngs pitched. No need to tie up more money long term in Peavy. The Cubs keep Marshall,Hart,Stevens,Olson as rotation depth/trade. Harden is already hurt. Zambrano is coming off a season with shoulder issues.

 

Maybe so, but clearly Hendry has no interests in Ben Sheets and I doubt that will change. It seems to me with Hendry it is "Peavy or bust."

[E.J.]

I still think a two year deal around 9 per is a steal for sheets if you can get protection based on inngs pitched. No need to tie up more money long term in Peavy. The Cubs keep Marshall,Hart,Stevens,Olson as rotation depth/trade. Harden is already hurt. Zambrano is coming off a season with shoulder issues.

 

Maybe so, but clearly Hendry has no interests in Ben Sheets and I doubt that will change. It seems to me with Hendry it is "Peavy or bust."

 

Where has it been written that Hendry has no interest in Sheets?

[CubColtPacer]

I still think a two year deal around 9 per is a steal for sheets if you can get protection based on inngs pitched. No need to tie up more money long term in Peavy. The Cubs keep Marshall,Hart,Stevens,Olson as rotation depth/trade. Harden is already hurt. Zambrano is coming off a season with shoulder issues.

 

Maybe so, but clearly Hendry has no interests in Ben Sheets and I doubt that will change. It seems to me with Hendry it is "Peavy or bust."

 

Where has it been written that Hendry has no interest in Sheets?

 

Bruce has said several times that they aren't particularly interested in Sheets because of the injury risk and being a type A free agent. One of those quotes is on the first page of the currently active Sheets thread.

[Cubswin11]

Sheets just submitted a new medical report to teams. It's quite possible that there is serious concern, not just among the cubs, throughout baseball that there is something wrong with him or a good chance he might get hurt again. When a guy like Burnett (who Sheets had a better year than last year), and to a lesser extent Lowe, are getting the type of deals they got there is no reason Sheets shouldn't get a comparable deal, unless there is something wrong with him.

[cubsfan26]

Yeah there's obviously something very wrong with Sheets thats gonna prevent him for staying on the mound in the future. Otherwise guys like AJ Burnett, Derek Lowe, and Ryan Dempster wouldn't be getting big deals, without Sheets in that mix. So anybody trying to make a case for Sheets by comparing his past health history Peavy or anybody else is pretty much worthless. Teams aren't stupid and just passing on the guy, due to his previous health. Sheets is too good of a pitcher not to even get offered a 2 year contract by this point of the offseason.

[TruffleShuffle]

Bruce has said several times that they aren't particularly interested in Sheets because of the injury risk and being a type A free agent. One of those quotes is on the first page of the currently active Sheets thread.

 

injury risk i certainly understand; however, i don't understand the type A concern. they'd be losing a draft pick in the lower half of the first round; if they trade for peavy they'd be giving up a guy who was picked in the high first round, plus other prospects.

[RedFlash]

Where has it been written that Hendry has no interest in Sheets?

 

How about the fact that NOTHING has been written period about Hendry's interests in Sheets? You have not heard of the Cubs been connected to Sheets other then this board. So maybe that's a hint as to the interest level that Hendry has for Sheets?

[CUBZ99]

No need to make Peavy commitment at this point

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/hayes/1397874,hayes-ricketts-cubs-012609.article

It’s always easier to spend someone else’s money, especially in these tough times. That’s what is amusing about sentiment that Tom Ricketts, the leading bidder to buy the Cubs, should agree to swallow Jake Peavy’s $63 million dollar contract to prove he’s committed to winning.

 

Isn’t shelling out $900 million — $200 million more than the previous record price for a baseball franchise — during a national economic meltdown commitment enough, especially when it will take hundreds of millions more to refurbish crumbling Wrigley Field?

 

The Cubs need another starting pitcher because the fifth spot in the rotation remains in flux and because Rich Harden’s right arm is held together with Silly String. The infatuation with Peavy, however, has become so great that some appear willing to deem the Cubs’ offseason a failure if the 2007 NL Cy Young winner isn’t acquired before pitchers and catchers report to spring training.

 

Even without Peavy, the Cubs have the best rotation in the NL Central and among the best in the National League heading into Cactus League play. Pitchers such as Braden Looper, Randy Wolf and Jon Garland offer more affordable alternatives without eliminating the possibility of acquiring Peavy at a later date if an extra All-Star caliber arm is needed.

 

What does the amount he paid have to do with his commitment to winning?

 

Agreed. It just shows how ridiculous this article is. Hendry has basically painted the new owner into a corner on Peavy. Everybody in Chicago believes that the Cubs can get Peavy and all that Hendry is waiting for is the approval of the new owner. If Ricketts doesn't give the approval, he will get bashed endlessly for being a cheapskate, and the beginning of his tenure as the new owner will start off on the wrong foot. If he gives the green light to get Peavy, he starts off as a hero, serious about winning. Masterstroke on Hendry's part.