Re: Peavy High on Cubs Wish List

[Banedon]

You're right. I never said a deal wouldn't make Towers happy without Soto -- just that any deal without Soto that would make Towers happy would be too much to offer from Hendry's perspective.....which is exactly what happened.

 

I win.

 

I could see towers and hendry tripping on shrooms while going to see cirque du soleil to discuss this deal.

 

Didn't happen.

 

You lose.

[imb]

i think it's pretty clear that right or wrong, meph always loses

[Rusch33]

Does this remind anyone of how the Twins tried to trade Santana before settling on a so-so package?

 

IIRC, they tried raping the Yankees/Red Sox for Santana, and then, everything died for awhile.

[davearm2]

Does this remind anyone of how the Twins tried to trade Santana before settling on a so-so package?

 

IIRC, they tried raping the Yankees/Red Sox for Santana, and then, everything died for awhile.

For anyone still hopeful of getting this done, the problem with that analogy is neither the Yankees or Red Sox emerged with Santana in the end.

 

When they walked away, they stayed away.

[NOLA]

With the question marks surrounding our staff, Marshall is much more valuable than he seems at first glance. No, Marshall is not a deal breaker, but him plus looting our depth along with our best prospect was a bit much for another starter. Our bench was a huge asset to us last year. IMO, the proposed package for Peavy would only be acceptable if it were for a stud power right fileder, not another arm no matter how good. Our weakness is our offense, and right now it cannot compete with the bats of Philly, or even the Mets.

Just slapped some numbers into a spreadsheet, and what came out was this.

 

As-is, Marshall ought to get in the neighborhood of 22 starts, assuming 20 for Harden and 30 each for Zambrano, Dempster, Lilly, and Marquis. (Now we know in reality a few of those guys will get 33 or 34, and one or two will get 25 or something, but the average of 30 seems OK.)

 

If Marquis and Marshall both go, and Peavy comes in, then you need Peavy and a Mitch Atkins type to provide the 52 starts you just lost.

 

So do you prefer Marquis 30 + Marshall 22, or Peavy 30 + Atkins 22? Obviously those 22 Atkins starts could be painful but IMO it'd be worth the upgrade from Marquis to Peavy.

 

I agree with just about all of that, but then when you factor in losing DeRosa and Vitters on top of that, and then throw in Pie, Castillo, whoever...just too much. What if then God forbid a position player gets hurt midseason, further damaging a suspect offense? We would have NO chips left to trade to plug that hole. I'm saying our margin for error would shrink dramatically for a luxury meaning Peavy.

[cubsfan26]

oh my heavens, we can't give up our SWING MAN! NOT OUR SWING MAN!

 

 

And our top prospect, starting 2b/depth, and most of our trading chips, seriously just stop. Hey who cares if it weakens our team, and we only win 87 games next year, we have JAKE PEAVY!

[imb]

i'm not going to sweat not getting this deal done right now

 

sure, maybe derosa shouldn't be the deal breaker and neither should sean marshall, but there's a cumulative effect. If the other guy is demanding a 6-for-1 or whatever, that's an instance where sean marshall is the straw that breaks the camel's back, so to speak. You want sean marshall and derosa? fine, but you can't have them and five more freaking players. this isn't madden.

[Butterscup1679666578]

i'm not going to sweat not getting this deal done right now

 

sure, maybe derosa shouldn't be the deal breaker and neither should sean marshall, but there's a cumulative effect. If the other guy is demanding a 6-for-1 or whatever, that's an instance where sean marshall is the straw that breaks the camel's back, so to speak. You want sean marshall and derosa? fine, but you can't have them and five more freaking players. this isn't madden.

 

agreed. obviously i was hoping it'd get done now, but i've got no problems with hendry using his leverage and putting this on the backburner while going to get a RF (bradley)

 

if this deal is dead for good it sucks, but we're not hurting at SP.

Edited December 12, 2008 by Butterscup

[davearm2]

Well said in the last few posts guys.

 

There's no one single dealbreaker, so the "OMG not our swingman" "OMG not our 34YO 2B" "OMG not our A-ball prospect" comments really miss the point.

[Backtobanks]

i'm not going to sweat not getting this deal done right now

 

sure, maybe derosa shouldn't be the deal breaker and neither should sean marshall, but there's a cumulative effect. If the other guy is demanding a 6-for-1 or whatever, that's an instance where sean marshall is the straw that breaks the camel's back, so to speak. You want sean marshall and derosa? fine, but you can't have them and five more freaking players. this isn't madden.[/quote

 

I wanted Hendry to find a way to keep 2 out of Marshall, Derosa, and Vitters. By trading two (or all three) plus the others mentioned in addition to paying half of Marquis' contract finally was too much to deal with. As much as all of us wanted Peavy, anybody who thinks the loss of Marshall, DeRosa, and Marquis (as a group) wouldn't be missed is kidding themself.

[daske17]

Does this remind anyone of how the Twins tried to trade Santana before settling on a so-so package?

 

IIRC, they tried raping the Yankees/Red Sox for Santana, and then, everything died for awhile.

For anyone still hopeful of getting this done, the problem with that analogy is neither the Yankees or Red Sox emerged with Santana in the end.

 

When they walked away, they stayed away.

 

Another key difference is that Santana didn't have a no-trade clause, which gave the Twins more bargaining power. They weren't forced to work with only certain teams as dictated by Santana.

[BigbadB]

Does this remind anyone of how the Twins tried to trade Santana before settling on a so-so package?

 

IIRC, they tried raping the Yankees/Red Sox for Santana, and then, everything died for awhile.

For anyone still hopeful of getting this done, the problem with that analogy is neither the Yankees or Red Sox emerged with Santana in the end.

 

When they walked away, they stayed away.

 

You have a point. But, Santana didn't have a full NTC, either. Peavy can name what team he will be traded to, or he can demand that he not be traded at all. Fact.

 

The Padres opened up this can of worms with Peavy. He has all the cards and he can play which ever one he wants. Towers can spend the next 2 months working out this brilliant 10 for 1 package that the Angels are ready to sign off on, and Peavy can chuckle and say, "NO DEAL, KEVY".

 

Towers gave Peavy every impression that he was being dealt to the Cubs. So much so, that Peavy was singing "Go Cubs Go" in a Vegas bar during the winter meetings, which gives the impression that Peavy is not only fine with a trade to the Cubs, but that he felt comfortable with it.

 

Towers has kicked Peavy in the nads by turning what appeared to be a done deal trade to the Cubs into a dead end. What hasn't helped Towers in all of this is just how public he has been through the entirety of the negotations. He has basically shown Peavy a level of disrespect that Peavy can use as his own leverage against Towers.

 

I saw a Rotoworld blurb that mentioned that it's possible that Peavy is so mad at Towers at this point, which favors Towers, as Peavy could expand his list of teams just so that he can be rid of the Padres organization. That's a reasonable assumption. But, Peavy seemed to have his heart set on the Cubs. Towers may just have to go back to Hendry with his tail between his legs. When that happens, I'm guessing Hendry will require that it be a much more private negotiation, since these latest dealings sound like Hendry got more and more fed up with Towers' games.

[cubsfan26]

Does this remind anyone of how the Twins tried to trade Santana before settling on a so-so package?

 

IIRC, they tried raping the Yankees/Red Sox for Santana, and then, everything died for awhile.

For anyone still hopeful of getting this done, the problem with that analogy is neither the Yankees or Red Sox emerged with Santana in the end.

 

When they walked away, they stayed away.

 

Another key difference is that Santana didn't have a no-trade clause, which gave the Twins more bargaining power. They weren't forced to work with only certain teams as dictated by Santana.

 

 

Yes he did, and he would only waive it if they sent him to a east coast team that was willing to give him the contract he wanted.

[abuck1220]

oh my heavens, we can't give up our SWING MAN! NOT OUR SWING MAN!

 

 

And our top prospect, starting 2b/depth, and most of our trading chips, seriously just stop. Hey who cares if it weakens our team, and we only win 87 games next year, we have JAKE PEAVY!

 

i can't see how getting jake peavy is going to knock 10 wins off the cubs 2007 total, but my post was in response to this...

 

i don't know about that...we would have needed to part ways with marquis and marshall is our swing man since we aren't keeping gaudin around...

 

would else would we use in absence of marshall?

 

people seem to be concerned about losing two pitchers (marshall and marquis) and replacing them with one.

[BigbadB]

people seem to be concerned about losing two pitchers (marshall and marquis) and replacing them with one.

 

I haven't seen anyone that said that. Not one.

[abuck1220]

people seem to be concerned about losing two pitchers (marshall and marquis) and replacing them with one.

 

I haven't seen anyone that said that. Not one.

 

the post i quoted pretty much says that.

[UMFan83]

Remember Desipio's rumor way back in November?

 

A source within the Padres organization claims that it’s “basically a done deal” (whatever basically means) that Peavy is headed to Chicago, and that the Cubs will send back Felix Pie, Sean Marshall and Ryan Theriot.

 

LOL Kinda funny how that one never materialized, or even close to it. I wonder if Theriots name was ever mentioned in trade talks.

[CUBZ99]

Remember Desipio's rumor way back in November?

 

A source within the Padres organization claims that it’s “basically a done deal” (whatever basically means) that Peavy is headed to Chicago, and that the Cubs will send back Felix Pie, Sean Marshall and Ryan Theriot.

 

LOL Kinda funny how that one never materialized, or even close to it. I wonder if Theriots name was ever mentioned in trade talks.

 

Good thing the Cubs didn't make that trade. Theriot is the 2nd or 3rd best SS in the league and can play multiple positions.

[davearm2]

Does this remind anyone of how the Twins tried to trade Santana before settling on a so-so package?

 

IIRC, they tried raping the Yankees/Red Sox for Santana, and then, everything died for awhile.

For anyone still hopeful of getting this done, the problem with that analogy is neither the Yankees or Red Sox emerged with Santana in the end.

 

When they walked away, they stayed away.

 

Another key difference is that Santana didn't have a no-trade clause, which gave the Twins more bargaining power. They weren't forced to work with only certain teams as dictated by Santana.

This is incorrect. Santana had a full NTC, by virtue of winning the CY in 2006.

 

4 years/$39.75M (2005-08)

 

signed extension with Minnesota 2/05 (avoided arbitration, $6.8M-$5M)

05:$5.5M, 06:$9M, 07:$12M, 08:$13.25M

award bonuses:

$25,000 each for All Star, 2nd in MVP, 3rd in CY vote

 

$50,000 each for Gold Glove, MVP, LCS MVP, 2nd in CY vote

 

$100,000 each for WS MVP, Cy Young award

 

limited no-trade clause 2006-08

may block trades to 3 clubs in 05, 8 in 06, 10 in 07 & 12 in 08

full no-trade for 2007-08 with top 3 in CY vote in 06 or 07

[BigbadB]

people seem to be concerned about losing two pitchers (marshall and marquis) and replacing them with one.

 

I haven't seen anyone that said that. Not one.

 

the post i quoted pretty much says that.

 

Who said it. What do the rest of their posts say about this particular topic?

 

I challenge you to find one person on this site or anywhere in Cubbyville that would not like to see a Jason Marquis and Sean Marshall straight up swap for Jake Peavy.

[sneakypower]

i'm not too thrilled about people over dramatizing the "7 for 1" thing

 

Hart, Cedeno, Guzman are all easily replaceable off of the scrap heap. what are Denny Bautista or Yorman Bazardo doing these days? where is Gookie Dawkins these days? they're so insignificant i don't too much care what we throw out there in their stead. Marshall was our loogy last year, uh oh where can i find one of those?? hell, the club can't trust Pie to do anything more than late inning defensive substitution and pinch running. OK, where is Freddy Guzman?

 

you've really got Vitters and Derosa were the only players of any consequence whatsoever in the deal. i can surely part with them for a CY winner

[David]

Remember Desipio's rumor way back in November?

 

A source within the Padres organization claims that it’s “basically a done deal” (whatever basically means) that Peavy is headed to Chicago, and that the Cubs will send back Felix Pie, Sean Marshall and Ryan Theriot.

 

LOL Kinda funny how that one never materialized, or even close to it. I wonder if Theriots name was ever mentioned in trade talks.

 

Good thing the Cubs didn't make that trade. Theriot is the 2nd or 3rd best SS in the league and can play multiple positions.

 

haha

[wade]

I probably missed it somewhere in the long thread, but part of Towers' demands that might have been deemed to much by Hendry could be the taking on of the salary in its entirety.

 

Am I nuts, or do the teams looking to get out from under a contract that's too big for them usually offer to take on some of the money to get better prospects in return? Towers wanted the Cubs to take the whole contract and offer up a lot of guys.

 

I guess I'm thinking of the Rangers paying part of A-Rod's salary in their trade, Rockies and Hampton, etc. Maybe if Towers ate 4 or 5 off the last year or two, when it really escalates, Hendry would have been more likely to trade the extra players.

[abuck1220]

people seem to be concerned about losing two pitchers (marshall and marquis) and replacing them with one.

 

I haven't seen anyone that said that. Not one.

 

the post i quoted pretty much says that.

 

Who said it. What do the rest of their posts say about this particular topic?

 

I challenge you to find one person on this site or anywhere in Cubbyville that would not like to see a Jason Marquis and Sean Marshall straight up swap for Jake Peavy.

 

like i said the first time, the post right above yours. i guess i'll have to quote it again...

 

i don't know about that...we would have needed to part ways with marquis and marshall is our swing man since we aren't keeping gaudin around...

 

would else would we use in absence of marshall?

 

that sure as [expletive] sounds like someone who is concerned about swapping two pitchers for one.

[BigbadB]

i'm not too thrilled about people over dramatizing the "7 for 1" thing

 

Fair enough. That's why this message board exists. To share your opinions and argue with people who don't agree with them.