Re: Peavy High on Cubs Wish List

[anabiono]

this is the end, my old dear friend, the end

[Bote McBoteface]

Wouldn't this actually be longer than the Roberts thread if we combined the two Peavy threads?

[tfarks]

Wouldn't this actually be longer than the Roberts thread if we combined the two Peavy threads?

 

Wasn't the other one to like 60 something?

[Little Slide Rooter]

So is this what the Cubs look like on opening day?

 

(not the batting order)

1B - Lee

2b - Fontonot

3b - Ramirez

SS - Theriot

Lf - Soriano

CF - Fukudome

RF - Bradley

C - Soto

 

Bench:

Miles

Gathright

Johnson

Bako

someone crappy like Uribe

 

Rotation:

Zambrano

Dempster

Harden

Lilly

Heilman

 

Bullpen:

Marmol

Gregg

Marshall

Vizcaino

Guzman

Wuertz

Cotts

 

Iowa:

Samardzija

Hart

Ascanio

Hoffpauir

 

Rule 5 pick gets sent back to Denver.

 

That team looks worse than 08. Hopefully Hendry has a significant move left in this offseason.

 

Hoff will be on the opening day roster. probably 1 less in the pen, likely Cotts, especially if Marshall is in the pen.

[cubswin2009]

Wouldn't this actually be longer than the Roberts thread if we combined the two Peavy threads?

 

Wasn't the other one to like 60 something?

It was over 100 I believe.

[17 Seconds]

Hoff will be on the opening day roster. probably 1 less in the pen, likely Cotts, especially if Marshall is in the pen.

 

How do you know Hoffpauir will be on the opening day roster?

[cubsfan26]

Looper or Wolf to a multi-year deal

 

 

Right now both Looper and Wolf are getting offered 1y at 5m, with incentives. I don't see any way Hendry adds another 5m plus salary for 2010, unless it's Peavy and we get the Ok from Ricketts.

[Clem Fandango]

Wouldn't this actually be longer than the Roberts thread if we combined the two Peavy threads?

 

Wasn't the other one to like 60 something?

It was over 100 I believe.

 

It was just under 100. Like 97 or something. Unless this trade rumor picks up steam it might fall just short if you combine the two. But there was another thread that discussed Peavy and other potential acquisitions at the time like Bradley that was 20+ pages I believe if you choose to include that

[Post Count Padder]

Wouldn't this actually be longer than the Roberts thread if we combined the two Peavy threads?

 

Wasn't the other one to like 60 something?

It was over 100 I believe.

 

It was just under 100. Like 97 or something. Unless this trade rumor picks up steam it might fall just short if you combine the two. But there was another thread that discussed Peavy and other potential acquisitions at the time like Bradley that was 20+ pages I believe if you choose to include that

Yeah, combine all that and Peavy was longer. Not that it really matters.

[bearjuice]

Cubs management acted quickly after Tribune Co. determined the Tom Ricketts-led group as the winning bidder to buy the ballclub, and it is possible Ricketts would oppose any deal involving Peavy and his $63 million price tag.

 

Thanks, Ricketts. You're a dream come true for us, Cub fans.

[Tyrant]

Cubs management acted quickly after Tribune Co. determined the Tom Ricketts-led group as the winning bidder to buy the ballclub, and it is possible Ricketts would oppose any deal involving Peavy and his $63 million price tag.

 

Thanks, Ricketts. You're a dream come true for us, Cub fans.

 

Read the sentence again. "It is possible Ricketts would oppose any deal involving Peavy ..."

 

It is also possible that Meph will someday actually satisfy a woman, but that's just speculation, too. I don't think this definitively reflects Ricketts' thinking.

[17 Seconds]

Cubs management acted quickly after Tribune Co. determined the Tom Ricketts-led group as the winning bidder to buy the ballclub, and it is possible Ricketts would oppose any deal involving Peavy and his $63 million price tag.

 

Thanks, Ricketts. You're a dream come true for us, Cub fans.

 

I'm putting no stock whatsoever into that article since it was clearly just speculation (not to mention the article still says "Jeff Peavy"), but that's an interesting thought. It would make a lot of sense as to why Olson was suddenly traded.

[weis21]

At this point, a better question would be:

 

Why would anyone ever place any stock in any source, at any time, about anything concerning the cubs? The only transaction forecasted correctly so far (in this apparent regrettable offseason) has been the bradley deal. A deal reported as "done" by several major networks a few days before it happened.

 

If something is in the works (yet I'm not sold there is anything), I doubt anyone has the "inside track". At least not on a trade of this magnitude.

 

Either we're going into next season resembling something close to what we have right now or something is going to happen out of the blue sometime between now and April 1st.

 

Hopefully I'm wrong, but that's what I expect. Either way, I'll still probably be checking the transaction thread daily.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

At this point, a better question would be:

 

Why would anyone ever place any stock in any source, at any time, about anything concerning the cubs? The only transaction forecasted correctly so far (in this apparent regrettable offseason) has been the bradley deal. A deal reported as "done" by several major networks a few days before it happened.

 

If something is in the works (yet I'm not sold there is anything), I doubt anyone has the "inside track". At least not on a trade of this magnitude.

 

Either we're going into next season resembling something close to what we have right now or something is going to happen out of the blue sometime between now and April 1st.

 

Hopefully I'm wrong, but that's what I expect. Either way, I'll still probably be checking the transaction thread daily.

 

Cedeno for Heilman was forecasted.

[weis21]

At this point, a better question would be:

 

Why would anyone ever place any stock in any source, at any time, about anything concerning the cubs? The only transaction forecasted correctly so far (in this apparent regrettable offseason) has been the bradley deal. A deal reported as "done" by several major networks a few days before it happened.

 

If something is in the works (yet I'm not sold there is anything), I doubt anyone has the "inside track". At least not on a trade of this magnitude.

 

Either we're going into next season resembling something close to what we have right now or something is going to happen out of the blue sometime between now and April 1st.

 

Hopefully I'm wrong, but that's what I expect. Either way, I'll still probably be checking the transaction thread daily.

 

Cedeno for Heilman was forecasted.

 

Yeah. But it wasn't Cedeno for Heilman. That's my point. Cedeno was obvioiusly the least important part of the equation. Cedeno will likely be a backup MI for his MLB career. Why in the hell would he be traded (plus some unnamed, yet apparently equally untalented minor league player) for a successful and proven MLB picther? It makes no sense. That says little about the people that insinuated that Cedeno would be traded for Heilman. They merely picked up half the story and ran with it. I'm not saying that they are misleading people. I'm saying rather that nothing was reported pertaining Pie to Baltimore (barring interest stemming back practically a year ago) and certainly nothing pertaining the newly acquired Olsen to Seattle.

 

Could it all be done in an elaborate measure to eventually net Peavy? Perhaps.

 

Could it be questionable moves by a GM that at times doesn't do what NSBB suggests (and normally rightfully so)? Certainly.

 

I hope it's all part of a "master plan" to acquire Jake Peavy. I've already braced myself that it is not.

[17 Seconds]

Pie for Olson was "forecasted" to a degree. There was definitely a lot of talk about that in the months prior to the trade, and not just because of Peavy. Interest in Heilman was forecasted. Interest in Bradley was forecasted. The trade of DeRosa was forecasted the day before it happen. Maruis to the Rockies was forecasted. Bako has been forecasted and it looks like he's about to sign.

 

Of course you can't put a lot of stock into rumors, but you can't write them off completely. There's obviously a lot of truth to them most of the time.

[weis21]

Pie for Olson was "forecasted" to a degree.

 

Already addressed that it wasn't current and AM has had a hard on for Pie since his term here

 

Interest in Heilman was forecasted.

 

Already addressed, never to the degree that it would include BOTH Cedeno and Olsen.

 

Interest in Bradley was forecasted.

 

Previously acknowledged.

 

The trade of DeRosa was forecasted the day before it happen.

 

Maybe it was, I was working for the greater part of both those days. Either way, it wasn't widely reported and it was just completely odd and caught most, if not all, Cubs fans off guard.

 

 

Maruis to the Rockies was forecasted.

 

This one you can have. I too hear rumors and I hoped they were true. I'd rather have Gaudin, Marshall, Heilman, or any other candidate over 2009 Marquis, but that's just me.

 

Bako has been forecasted and it looks like he's about to sign.

 

First, I don't care. Second, it hasn't happened. Thrid, if I had Paul's cell number he would probably tell me the same thing. Nobody cares about Paul Bako.

Edited January 29, 2009 by weis21

[17 Seconds]

I don't have a link for this so I'm going to have to post the whole thing, even though it's really long

 

This is from a Crain's Business Report:

 

Cubs buyer won't swing for fences

By: Mike Colias and Ann Saphir January 26, 2009

 

Don't expect an early-inning spending spree from Thomas Ricketts if the bond salesman becomes the owner of the Chicago Cubs by opening day.

 

Mr. Ricketts and his family plan to borrow up to half the $900 million they have offered for the ball club in a deal that would set a record for a Major League franchise.

 

Even if he finds willing lenders in the coming weeks amid tight credit markets, annual debt payments could soak up much of the team's cash flow — limiting his ability to invest significantly in the team or its ballpark.

 

The amount Mr. Ricketts would be able to spend on Wrigley Field renovations or star players seems to depend on how much more of their own money he and his family are willing to sink into his baseball fantasy. Mr. Ricketts is likely to search for new revenue streams, but that will take time.

 

"They'll have to find ways to grow revenue," says J. C. Bradbury, a sports economist at Kennesaw State University in Georgia. "They'll probably be borrowing from themselves for a while."

 

The Ricketts family expects to turn a small profit or break even while maintaining or boosting payroll, according to a person involved in the deal.

 

Tribune Co. last week selected the family — a billionaire Omaha clan that founded discount brokerage TD Ameritrade — over two other bidders. The family likely will spend the next several weeks working to line up loans before Tribune submits the proposal to Major League Baseball owners for approval. The media company insisted on a debt-heavy deal for tax reasons: The more debt used to finance the transaction, the less Tribune would have to pay in capital-gains tax.

 

DEEP INTO DEBT

 

Mr. Ricketts could finance as much as half the deal — $450 million — with borrowed money, according to a person familiar with the offer. That would saddle him with up to $45 million in annual debt payments, far more than the $31 million in cash flow the team generated in 2007. And costs have climbed since then: The team's payroll rose 20% last year to $130 million.

 

Another possible source of cash is the 25% stake in regional cable channel Comcast SportsNet, which was included in the deal. The channel, which televises Cubs games and other local sports, doesn't disclose how much cash it generates for its owners.

 

Mr. Ricketts hasn't spoken publicly about the deal since Thursday night, when he said that he and his family "share the goal of Cubs fans everywhere to win a World Series and build the consistent championship tradition that the fans deserve."

 

A family spokesman says, "It would be inappropriate and inaccurate to speculate while negotiations are ongoing for the purchase of the Cubs."

 

But the 43-year-old CEO of Chicago-based Incapital LLC seems aware of the financial realities: The avid Cubs fan is in no rush to undertake a big Wrigley renovation, according to a person familiar with Mr. Ricketts' thinking. He is sensitive to the 95-year-old ballpark's historic character and favors setting aside money over many years for a major renovation at least five years out, the source says.

 

Waiting on a renovation that could include lucrative corporate suites would leave Mr. Ricketts groping for new sources of revenue just as the recession makes it harder to raise ticket prices or sign new advertising or corporate sponsorships.

 

Relying on the family's wealth also could pose challenges given the flagging stock market, which has eroded the value of their TD Ameritrade stock holdings from $2.4 billion last summer to $1.5 billion.

 

I'm starting to think it's actually possible that Jim has gotten word that he's not going to be able to add Peavy's salary

[weis21]

If they are in danger of losing so much money and are unsure if they are going to turn a profit, why the hell did they just spend almost a billion dollars on a damn baseball team?

[RedFlash]

I'm starting to think it's actually possible that Jim has gotten word that he's not going to be able to add Peavy's salary

 

I'm thinking that maybe it wasn't so smart to spend $900 million on the Cubs. With the way the article made it sound, it will be awhile before Rickett's family will approve (if they will ever) the Cubs going after a major FA or a highly paid player via trade. With I am saying is get use to the current team, cause I doubt you will see a major acquisition any time soon.

[RedFlash]

If they are in danger of losing so much money and are unsure if they are going to turn a profit, why the hell did they just spend almost a billion dollars on a damn baseball team?

 

I know. They're like me......but with money. It seem to me that they didn't think this through, and that their "inner Cub fan" overrule their business acumen. This definately reeks of an "impulse" buy for the Ricketts family.

[17 Seconds]

We'll see how good Jim Hendry is without buckets of cash to bail him out

[Banedon]

I think jersey has been saying this for a long time, but those of use that were looking forward to new ownership (and I'm included in that) need to be careful what we wish for. If that article is true, and Ricketts and the Cubs are going to be a bit strapped financially, that's not good. The Trib was continuing to increase payroll every year. (Worked out well for them eh?)

 

Should be interesting to see what Hendry can do without blank checks to hand around.

 

EDIT: heh...almost directly quoting you there, dexter, was unintentional

[C.C.]

I agree. This situation scares the crap out of me. I'm not sold on the Ricketts, and I'm nervous we'll be missing the Tribune. I'm hoping he pulls out and doesn't buy the Cubs. He sounds like he's going to be cash strapped on day 1. Oh man, this could be bad.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Hoff will be on the opening day roster. probably 1 less in the pen, likely Cotts, especially if Marshall is in the pen.

 

How do you know Hoffpauir will be on the opening day roster?

 

I should have said probably. Otherwise, there wont be anything remotely resembling power on the bench.

 

I imagine Lou would choose the extra bat on the bench over the extra arm, especially since we have so many guys in the pen capable of pitching multiple inings.

Edited January 29, 2009 by Little Slide Rooter