Re: Peavy High on Cubs Wish List

[UMFan83]

3:27pm: MLB.com's Mark Bowman says the Braves "won't even think about renewing their pursuit of Peavy unless the talks are initiated by the Padres, who will no longer find a compensation package that includes Yunel Escobar." Escobar is apparently off the table because the Braves no longer have Brent Lillibridge.

 

LOL, Towers is getting backed into a wall

[abuck1220]

 

Marshall is extremely valuable when Rich Harden is in your rotation. Without Marshall who iflls in for him when he misses half the season? Samardzija? Guadin? Guzman?

 

jake peavy is in your rotation, so sure one of those three guys can do it. i'm not really concerned about it if my first four are peavy, z, lilly and dempster.

 

 

yawn.

 

Would you seriously trade DeRosa, Marshall, Vitters, Pie, Cedeno, Hart and Guzman for Peavy?

 

probably, yes.

 

Plus, what happens if you need upgrades at the deadline? What happens if the bullpen sucks, or Ramirez goes down for the season? What do you have to trade? Absolutely nothing.

 

so you held on to ronny cedeno. he's not getting you a ramirez-level replacement at 3b anyway, so who cares?

[17 Seconds]

Because the 7th and 8th guys might be the guys who could acquire someone like Hermida

 

 

Are you kidding me?

 

Nope. Not at all. Marshall and Pie would be a nice package for Hermida. Maybe even Marshall and Vitters.

 

Maybe it's not enough. If so, look elsewhere.

 

I'm just baffled that anyone would think you just keep throwing more and more names at someone in hopes that it will be enough when it is obviously clear that the other team has zero leverage.

 

Wait, so Marshall and Pie would have been the 7th and 8th best players? Okay.

[RynoRules]

To call prospects "worthless" (with some obvious exceptions) is unrealistic, IMO. Value is a subjective quality.

[Keener98]

DeRosa did great at the middle to end of last season. But he wasn't that great at the beginning or the previous season. I think Fontenot can slip right in and we wouldn't even notice a big of a difference. But in the case of the roation. I think peavy over Marquis is a pretty big difference. You're basically adding another #1 while subtracting a #5. I hope this Marquis to the Mets stuff is true. Then we can go back to the Peavy stuff.

 

Might want to check your facts before you claim stuff. Dero put up 3 straight months of OPS 835 or higher to start the season. Outside of his Aug where he OPS'd 1.100 those first 3 months of the season were Deros highest OPS's by month.

[jersey cubs fan]

Worthless in your eyes, but not necessarily worthless to other teams. If Baltimore would have traded Garrett Olson for Pie, and then Olson was part of the deal for Peavy, that is not worthless. These talks were close to being done without Marquis or DeRosa being added to the discussions. Once DeRosa became part of the equation, someone else should be removed, and more than likely Marshall, if not Pie as well.

 

You have no idea where the talks were and when that was. The fact is the Cubs were enormous beneficiaries of a player inexplicably listing them as the sole destination to which he would accept a trade. Without that stance by Peavy, a stance that could evaporate in a second, the Cubs wouldn't even come close to making the best bid for Peavy.

[PrimeTime]

Roto

 

The Mets and Cubs are reportedly talking about a Jason Marquis deal.

There was talk about Aaron Heilman for Marquis as recently as yesterday, but it's believed the Mets turned down that deal weeks ago. Scott Schoeneweis for Marquis would make a lot more sense. Both are entering their contract years. Schoeneweis is owed $3.6 million, while Marquis is due $9.875 million.

[RyneDawson]

If there was an 8 for 1 deal and the players were Vitters, Pie, Hart, Guzman, Marshall, DeRosa, Marquis and Cedeno all for Peavy, I would still do it in a second. I basically have given up on Pie. All he has is "tools." Meaning he is fast, can hit for power if he hits it, and can catch the ball. That doesn't make someone a good player. Hart hasn't impressed me at all, Guzman is never healthy, Marshall can be replaced by anyone. If Harden goes down then we can put Samardzija in the rotation, Gaudin, or call up a guy from the minors or go sign someone or make a trade. DeRosa is good, but its his last year with us, and Fontenot wont be a big downgrade. Cedeno is awful and will never be good, Marquis is terrible, and Vitters is the only one who "can" be good. So lets trade him before no one thinks highly of him anymore. I really would do that trade in a second.

[BigbadB]

What contenders have a rotation whose second and third starters are that big of question marks?

 

Umm. All of 'em.

 

Okay, so name a contender whose numbers 2 and 3 starters are as likely to get hurt and regress as Harden and Dempster

 

Haha. Yeah, right. I'll get right on that. Any player can get hurt or regress.

 

Uhh yeah, but what players are as likely as Harden and Dempster? It's not jyst a chance, it's a good chance.

 

So you say "all of em" when I ask what teams are that suspect, and then why I ask to give an example you sau "haha, yeah right"

 

Well played.

 

I already gave examples. I said ALL OF THEM.

 

That's not an example, that's a blanket statement because you have no answer.

 

Name one contender who has a number 2 that is as likely to get hurt as Harden and a number 3 who is as likely to add a run and a half onto his ERA as Dempster.

 

Just one

 

Someone already did up above. The World Series winner. And they named a few more as well. I'm done here. I have work to do, and as much as you would like to give me some sort of homework assignment, I'm going to go do my own work.

 

I've never been a big Hendry fan, but I am not complaining about this particular decision to back off on an 8 for 1 deal for Peavy. That's just silly. Not only that, Peavy is no lock to be be the stud in the NL Central that he was in the NL West. Doesn't mean I wouldn't love to have him. Just not for the entire farm.

[17 Seconds]

 

Marshall is extremely valuable when Rich Harden is in your rotation. Without Marshall who iflls in for him when he misses half the season? Samardzija? Guadin? Guzman?

 

jake peavy is in your rotation, so sure one of those three guys can do it. i'm not really concerned about it if my first four are peavy, z, lilly and dempster.

 

 

yawn.

 

Would you seriously trade DeRosa, Marshall, Vitters, Pie, Cedeno, Hart and Guzman for Peavy?

 

probably, yes.

 

Plus, what happens if you need upgrades at the deadline? What happens if the bullpen sucks, or Ramirez goes down for the season? What do you have to trade? Absolutely nothing.

 

so you held on to ronny cedeno. he's not getting you a ramirez-level replacement at 3b anyway, so who cares?

 

The bottom line is that giving up DeRosa, Marshall, Vitters, Pie, Cedeno, Hart and Guzman for Peavy owuld be foolish, especially when Towers has no leverage. That is bastly overpaying, even Axelrod acknowledges that.

[CubinNY]

Because the 7th and 8th guys might be the guys who could acquire someone like Hermida

 

 

Are you kidding me?

 

Nope. Not at all. Marshall and Pie would be a nice package for Hermida. Maybe even Marshall and Vitters.

 

Maybe it's not enough. If so, look elsewhere.

 

I'm just baffled that anyone would think you just keep throwing more and more names at someone in hopes that it will be enough when it is obviously clear that the other team has zero leverage.

Nobody I know has said anything of the sort. Your' the one who suggested that.

 

The players the Cubs were giving up for Peavey are spare parts. Spare parts are not something that should have held up this deal.

 

I love the idea that making the team better comes down to some sort of pissing contest between Hendry and Towers. I'm really sick of the word leverage. It's pretty obvious that Hendry didn't have the leverage he thought he had or else this deal would have been done.

 

Just trying to stay competitive in the division is not good enough.

[abuck1220]

the 7th and 8th best prospects in the cubs terrible farm system is not going to get hermida. come on. if kevin hart and ronny cedeno are deal breakers, you don't think twice about it. you could replace them both in one second.

 

Who do you replace them with? Hart, Cedeno, Atkins, Guzman, even Pie may not have a ton of value to other teams, but 1) they asked for them for a reason, and 2) the Cubs already weak system has no one to pick up the slack for them in the organization. It's one thing to not care if one of them goes in a deal, it's another to care if they all go, it's how you end up with Les Walrond pitching in meaningful games or Joe Simokaitis getting meaningful at bats.

 

kevin hart and ronny cedeno weren't necessary in meaningful games last year, so i don't think their replacements would be this year.

 

They will when you've traded away Marshall, Marquis, Guzman, Atkins, and DeRosa too, that's the point.

 

well, in theory, replacing marquis with peavy would soften the blow of replacing your second string ss with your third string ss.

[Sever82]

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/8926844/Thursday-MLB-winter-meetings-blog

 

Peavy is good as gone. I'm pretty sure he'll approve a trade to the Angels. If this post is right from Rosenthal, then the cubs are done with Peavy.

[C.C.]

People aren't looking at the big picture, it's not just what we give up. It's what it does to the team and roster, losing DeRosa and Marshall really hurts team depth. Losing Guzman takes away a reliever with has a bunch of upside in the pen. Trading Pie, Vitters and others takes away all our good trade pieces. Tell me this, what we gonna do if Ramirez or Soriano miss a month or two? Mix that with possibly having Milton Bradley in RF? What we gonna do if Harden makes only 15 starts next year? Who's starting Randy Wells or Mitch Atkins? What if we need to add a player midseason, who do we have to trade? It's not the best interest of the team to trade all of these players for one player. Unless you rather lose with Peavy then win overall.

 

 

Pftttt...

 

Peavy is a difference maker, all the others you listed aren't.

[Cubswin11]

3:27pm: MLB.com's Mark Bowman says the Braves "won't even think about renewing their pursuit of Peavy unless the talks are initiated by the Padres, who will no longer find a compensation package that includes Yunel Escobar." Escobar is apparently off the table because the Braves no longer have Brent Lillibridge.

 

LOL, Towers is getting backed into a wall

Yeah, unless Peavy accepts a trade to the Angels (which might be likely) or Towers wants to trade him to a division rival in the Dodgers, the Cubs are the only team he can really trade him to. I don't know if a deal will get done but I find it hard to believe we have seen the last of Peavy to the Cubs reports.

[RynoRules]

Roto

 

The Mets and Cubs are reportedly talking about a Jason Marquis deal.

There was talk about Aaron Heilman for Marquis as recently as yesterday, but it's believed the Mets turned down that deal weeks ago. Scott Schoeneweis for Marquis would make a lot more sense. Both are entering their contract years. Schoeneweis is owed $3.6 million, while Marquis is due $9.875 million.

 

That is worth it if only to shed 6 mill in salary. Frees you up to (perhaps) do more to get Peavy or at least be a player for more than one expensive FA.

[jersey cubs fan]

To call prospects "worthless" (with some obvious exceptions) is unrealistic, IMO. Value is a subjective quality.

 

Many of the names I'm hearing hardly even count as prospects. And probably more than one is just going to end up released by the Cubs or signing somewhere as a 6-year free agent.

 

 

We're dealing with milk here, time is only going to bring them further to expiration.

[17 Seconds]

What contenders have a rotation whose second and third starters are that big of question marks?

 

Umm. All of 'em.

 

Okay, so name a contender whose numbers 2 and 3 starters are as likely to get hurt and regress as Harden and Dempster

 

Haha. Yeah, right. I'll get right on that. Any player can get hurt or regress.

 

Uhh yeah, but what players are as likely as Harden and Dempster? It's not jyst a chance, it's a good chance.

 

So you say "all of em" when I ask what teams are that suspect, and then why I ask to give an example you sau "haha, yeah right"

 

Well played.

 

I already gave examples. I said ALL OF THEM.

 

That's not an example, that's a blanket statement because you have no answer.

 

Name one contender who has a number 2 that is as likely to get hurt as Harden and a number 3 who is as likely to add a run and a half onto his ERA as Dempster.

 

Just one

 

Someone already did up above. The World Series winner. And they named a few more as well. I'm done here. I have work to do, and as much as you would like to give me some sort of homework assignment, I'm going to go do my own work.

 

I've never been a big Hendry fan, but I am not complaining about this particular decision to back off on an 8 for 1 deal for Peavy. That's just silly. Not only that, Peavy is no lock to be be the stud in the NL Central that he was in the NL West. Doesn't mean I wouldn't love to have him. Just not for the entire farm.

 

The phillies are an awful example, and I already explained why. I never said question marks, I said injury and regression. The phillies aren't counting on Brett Myers to be Rich Harden, and they aren't counting on Joe Blanton to be like 2008 Dempster. They know what those guys are, and they're built around that. We're built around Harden being healthy and Dempster being good.

[jersey cubs fan]

but I am not complaining about this particular decision to back off on an 8 for 1 deal for Peavy. That's just silly.

 

The only silly thing is getting all hung up on the mediocre quantity.

[davearm2]

What contenders have a rotation whose second and third starters are that big of question marks?

 

Umm. All of 'em.

Certainly most, anyway.

 

All of the NL Central for sure.

 

Brett Myers as a #2 is surely a questionmark. As are John Maine and Javier Vazquez.

 

Is Kershaw the Dodgers #2 now behind Billingsley, with Lowe and Penny gone? Huge upside but definitely a questionmark.

 

I'm not talking about question marks, I'm talking about injury and regression. With those teams you're pretty know what you're getting and aren't really counting on those guys to be great. We're counting on that from Harden and Dempster.

 

The bottom line is that if Harden and Dempster get injured and suck, the rotation is not good. That is relevant because there is a pretty good chance both of those things happen.

If Harden and Dempster get injured and suck, then Lilly and Marquis/Marshall/Johnson move up the ladder and instead of being a vastly better rotation, it's a similar rotation.

 

I really don't think you've had a look at what some of these teams have going on right now. There are still FAs yet to sign, but it's not pretty a lot of places.

 

Just to give an example, the Mets now show Santana, Maine, Pelfrey, Niese, Knight. Ugh. The Cubs could lose two guys and still beat that 2-5.

 

Yes but the Mets will likely have a better offense and bullpen. Plus the Mets aren't that great. We're trying to be better than everybody else, not comparable.

You asked for an example and now that you have one (of many available, mind you), you want to try and redirect the conversation from rotations to offense and bullpen?

 

That's really weak man.

 

The point remains, on paper the Cubs still have a better rotation than anyone else in the NL, and injury and/or regression would merely bring them back to the pack. So if "comparable" only comes in your worst-case scenario, I'll happily live with that.

[RyneDawson]

This is exactly what I've been saying from the start. Everyone is like "Oh Hendry has leverage, Peavy only will come to the Cubs, wait it out Jim." While I kept saying "no this is stupid, right now Peavy only wants to come to the Cubs, but if Hendry waits too long and backs out then Peavy will start to reconsider other places, and SD will reconsider other teams and a bunch of other teams will jump in like ANA and offer way better players than we are, and get Peavy." And thats what will happen here. The Angels will offer SD a huge package of young guys, and SD will love it and beg Peavy to go there, and he will just to get off that team.

[cubsfan26]

What contenders have a rotation whose second and third starters are that big of question marks?

 

Umm. All of 'em.

 

Okay, so name a contender whose numbers 2 and 3 starters are as likely to get hurt and regress as Harden and Dempster

 

Haha. Yeah, right. I'll get right on that. Any player can get hurt or regress.

 

Uhh yeah, but what players are as likely as Harden and Dempster? It's not jyst a chance, it's a good chance.

 

So you say "all of em" when I ask what teams are that suspect, and then why I ask to give an example you sau "haha, yeah right"

 

Well played.

 

I already gave examples. I said ALL OF THEM.

 

That's not an example, that's a blanket statement because you have no answer.

 

Name one contender who has a number 2 that is as likely to get hurt as Harden and a number 3 who is as likely to add a run and a half onto his ERA as Dempster.

 

Just one

 

 

If Dempster isn't good, then Lilly will be the number 3. Lilly is as good or better then most teams number 3's. Yes Harden is more of a injury risk then most teams number 2. But he's also better then most teams number 2's. The mix of even having him for 15-20 with Marshall for 15-18 starts might be simliar to most teams number 2-3's. Yes career stat wise, Dempster is a risk to regress. But nothing he did last year shows that it was a fluke. Plus Dempster didn't just go out and do the samething he did when he was starting before. He changed his delivery, got himself in amazing shape, and I heard he started using another pitch more. If you don't think those things effected him in a big way, then maybe it was a fluke. But I don't think it's a given that he's a mid 4's era pitcher next year. Rich Harden missing starts is ALot more likely then Dempster falling apart.

Edited December 11, 2008 by cubsfan26

[jersey cubs fan]

The point remains, on paper the Cubs still have a better rotation than anyone else in the NL, and injury and/or regression would merely bring them back to the pack. So if "comparable" only comes in your worst-case scenario, I'll happily live with that.

 

Right now the Cubs are a worse pitching team than they were in 2008 and a worse hitting team than they were in 2008. The point remains they must improve just to get back to last year's level.

[17 Seconds]

What contenders have a rotation whose second and third starters are that big of question marks?

 

Umm. All of 'em.

Certainly most, anyway.

 

All of the NL Central for sure.

 

Brett Myers as a #2 is surely a questionmark. As are John Maine and Javier Vazquez.

 

Is Kershaw the Dodgers #2 now behind Billingsley, with Lowe and Penny gone? Huge upside but definitely a questionmark.

 

I'm not talking about question marks, I'm talking about injury and regression. With those teams you're pretty know what you're getting and aren't really counting on those guys to be great. We're counting on that from Harden and Dempster.

 

The bottom line is that if Harden and Dempster get injured and suck, the rotation is not good. That is relevant because there is a pretty good chance both of those things happen.

If Harden and Dempster get injured and suck, then Lilly and Marquis/Marshall/Johnson move up the ladder and instead of being a vastly better rotation, it's a similar rotation.

 

I really don't think you've had a look at what some of these teams have going on right now. There are still FAs yet to sign, but it's not pretty a lot of places.

 

Just to give an example, the Mets now show Santana, Maine, Pelfrey, Niese, Knight. Ugh. The Cubs could lose two guys and still beat that 2-5.

 

Yes but the Mets will likely have a better offense and bullpen. Plus the Mets aren't that great. We're trying to be better than everybody else, not comparable.

You asked for an example and now that you have one (of many available, mind you), you want to try and redirect the conversation from rotations to offense and bullpen?

 

That's really weak man.

 

The point remains, on paper the Cubs still have a better rotation than anyone else in the NL, and injury and/or regression would merely bring them back to the pack. So if "comparable" only comes in your worst-case scenario, I'll happily live with that.

 

I've already explained to you that I find that example weak, and I already explained it. You just are choosing not to listen. I didn't say "find a team who has question marks as big as Harden and Dempster". I asked who is as likely to get hurt or regress....not suck. The mets aren't expecting John maine to be Rich Harden, and they're not expecting Mike Pelfrey to be 2008 Dempster. Do you not get that? It is fine to expect maine and Pelfrey to perofmr like they did last season. I don't think it's fine to expect Harden to make as many starts as he did last season and to expect Dempster to pitch like he did last season.

Edited December 11, 2008 by 17 Seconds

[UMFan83]

3:27pm: MLB.com's Mark Bowman says the Braves "won't even think about renewing their pursuit of Peavy unless the talks are initiated by the Padres, who will no longer find a compensation package that includes Yunel Escobar." Escobar is apparently off the table because the Braves no longer have Brent Lillibridge.

 

LOL, Towers is getting backed into a wall

Yeah, unless Peavy accepts a trade to the Angels (which might be likely) or Towers wants to trade him to a division rival in the Dodgers, the Cubs are the only team he can really trade him to. I don't know if a deal will get done but I find it hard to believe we have seen the last of Peavy to the Cubs reports.

 

Didn't another team approach Axelrod yesterday about revising his list of teams and he basically said that he wasn't going to adjust his list and that he'd only goto the original 5 places.