Re: Peavy High on Cubs Wish List

[Backtobanks]

The Cubs payroll is around 140m, but if we trade Wuertz and Cotts it could be around 138m. So say the payroll will be around 145m(heard between 140-150m), that gives us around 7m to spend. Then if we can somehow trade Marquis and get at least 5.5-6m of his contract off the books, that would give us around 13m. After that the only guy who makes sense to trade and clear some payroll is Mark DeRosa(5.5m in 09).

 

 

Maybe DeRosa will get you a good prospect you can use in a deal for Peavy, and it would also give you some payroll room. We can use Fontenot at second vs RH pitching, and maybe sign a veteran like Mark Grudzielanek, Mark Loretta or Rich Aurilia cheap to play with Fontenot. So getting rid of a chunk of Marquis salary, then DeRosa salary could give us some payroll room. Then if ownership gives us a small payroll bump(say 148-150 instead of 145). Then I think we can pull off getting a good RF and Peavy. I'm just saying it's easier to replace DeRosa production with Fontenot and a veteran in a platoon, then finding a cheap replacement for Lee, and not losing too much production.

 

As much as I would love to add Peavy, we now have posters suggesting we trade Lee, DeRosa, Wuertz, and Cotts which would open at least 3 new holes on the team.

Assuming Marshall is part of a deal, the Cubs would have no lefties in the bullpen with the trade of Cotts. Hoffpauir has a possible future as a pinch hitter/DH, but not as a starter. As for DeRosa, he quite possibly was our 3rd MVP on the team. Let's not forget that the rotation goes into 2009 better than the 2008 rotation which lead the Cubs to over 90 wins. If we can acquire Peavy using spare parts and prospects, fine. If not, move on and fill the other holes on the team.

 

 

Just thinking out loud, but if the Cubs were to acquire Peavy, wouldn't we then have to move Marquis?

 

Good luck to Hendry in making that happen.

 

What if we traded our resident head case pitcher with the NTC clause and get the impact bat back for RF that we need.

 

Peavy, Dempster, Lilly, Harden & Marquis is still a darned good staff.

 

uh oh...you just did it

 

i say we trade Z to the yanks and get back hughes

 

then get peavy

 

i love the Z, but he is frustrating...

 

naw...i really don't know about that...he has actually been our only good pitcher in the playoffs two years running now

 

I guess I didn't realize just how good Peavy is since now we're up to trading Zambrano, Lee, DeRosa, Wuertz, and Cotts to acquire him. Peavy-Mania is unbelievable.

[David]

The Cubs payroll is around 140m, but if we trade Wuertz and Cotts it could be around 138m. So say the payroll will be around 145m(heard between 140-150m), that gives us around 7m to spend. Then if we can somehow trade Marquis and get at least 5.5-6m of his contract off the books, that would give us around 13m. After that the only guy who makes sense to trade and clear some payroll is Mark DeRosa(5.5m in 09).

 

 

Maybe DeRosa will get you a good prospect you can use in a deal for Peavy, and it would also give you some payroll room. We can use Fontenot at second vs RH pitching, and maybe sign a veteran like Mark Grudzielanek, Mark Loretta or Rich Aurilia cheap to play with Fontenot. So getting rid of a chunk of Marquis salary, then DeRosa salary could give us some payroll room. Then if ownership gives us a small payroll bump(say 148-150 instead of 145). Then I think we can pull off getting a good RF and Peavy. I'm just saying it's easier to replace DeRosa production with Fontenot and a veteran in a platoon, then finding a cheap replacement for Lee, and not losing too much production.

 

As much as I would love to add Peavy, we now have posters suggesting we trade Lee, DeRosa, Wuertz, and Cotts which would open at least 3 new holes on the team.

Assuming Marshall is part of a deal, the Cubs would have no lefties in the bullpen with the trade of Cotts. Hoffpauir has a possible future as a pinch hitter/DH, but not as a starter. As for DeRosa, he quite possibly was our 3rd MVP on the team. Let's not forget that the rotation goes into 2009 better than the 2008 rotation which lead the Cubs to over 90 wins. If we can acquire Peavy using spare parts and prospects, fine. If not, move on and fill the other holes on the team.

 

 

Just thinking out loud, but if the Cubs were to acquire Peavy, wouldn't we then have to move Marquis?

 

Good luck to Hendry in making that happen.

 

What if we traded our resident head case pitcher with the NTC clause and get the impact bat back for RF that we need.

 

Peavy, Dempster, Lilly, Harden & Marquis is still a darned good staff.

 

uh oh...you just did it

 

i say we trade Z to the yanks and get back hughes

 

then get peavy

 

i love the Z, but he is frustrating...

 

naw...i really don't know about that...he has actually been our only good pitcher in the playoffs two years running now

 

I guess I didn't realize just how good Peavy is since now we're up to trading Zambrano, Lee, DeRosa, Wuertz, and Cotts to acquire him. Peavy-Mania is unbelievable.

 

Obviously that is just some fantasyland deal, but Peavy > Z, Lee would be addition by subtraction because of the contract. The only loss that sort of hurts there is DeRosa.

 

I'm pretty sure Z makes more than Peavy, so you could even say the Lee and Z money saved would go a long way toward paying Tex.

[UMFan83]

Not really news just speculation:

 

2:00pm: David O'Brien says the Padres and Braves need each other and still believes Peavy winds up in Atlanta. I agree. O'Brien also says the Braves' talks for Ryan Ludwick aren't dead.

[haubrich91]

So everyone now wants to trade Zambrano, Lee, DeRosa and others just to get Peavy?

 

Why don't we just trade everyone...then we'll become the Padres.

[cubsfan26]

So everyone now wants to trade Zambrano, Lee, DeRosa and others just to get Peavy?

 

Why don't we just trade everyone...then we'll become the Padres.

 

 

I wouldn't say everybody, I think most of us mentioned trading one of those guys if it means getting Peavy. I mentioned DeRosa since I believe he's most replaceable, and could net us a good prospect we could use in a Peavy deal. I don't think using Fontenot at 2b, with a veteran RH 2b in a platoon would be that much less productive. While it would be pretty hard to replace Zambrano, especially if he ever returns to 03-06 Zambrano. Derrek Lee is replaceable, but you can't do it cheap. A 1b better or simliar to Lee is either gonna cost a good amount of money, or prospects we won't have if we wanna trade for Peavy. Plus I wouldn't put it past Lee to have a rebound type season next year.

[17 Seconds]

The Cubs payroll is around 140m, but if we trade Wuertz and Cotts it could be around 138m. So say the payroll will be around 145m(heard between 140-150m), that gives us around 7m to spend. Then if we can somehow trade Marquis and get at least 5.5-6m of his contract off the books, that would give us around 13m. After that the only guy who makes sense to trade and clear some payroll is Mark DeRosa(5.5m in 09).

 

 

Maybe DeRosa will get you a good prospect you can use in a deal for Peavy, and it would also give you some payroll room. We can use Fontenot at second vs RH pitching, and maybe sign a veteran like Mark Grudzielanek, Mark Loretta or Rich Aurilia cheap to play with Fontenot. So getting rid of a chunk of Marquis salary, then DeRosa salary could give us some payroll room. Then if ownership gives us a small payroll bump(say 148-150 instead of 145). Then I think we can pull off getting a good RF and Peavy. I'm just saying it's easier to replace DeRosa production with Fontenot and a veteran in a platoon, then finding a cheap replacement for Lee, and not losing too much production.

 

As much as I would love to add Peavy, we now have posters suggesting we trade Lee, DeRosa, Wuertz, and Cotts which would open at least 3 new holes on the team.

.

 

Wait, that would open up 3 holes? First of all, nobody is saying trade ALLof them for Peavy. Second, those guys aren't as crucial as you think. Wuertz and Cotts were worthless last year so I don't get what hole losing those guys would create. Trading DeRosa would be kind of a risk and would cause us to lose felixibility, but I'd be fine with sellingn high on DeRosa and giving Fontenot a full time job if it meant getting Peavy. Trading lee would open up a hole at first base, but it's not like that would have cost us last year when Lee was basically worthless at the plater after April. I'd be open to trading Lee anyways just to get out of that contract. he is clearly on the back end.

[17 Seconds]

So everyone now wants to trade Zambrano, Lee, DeRosa and others just to get Peavy?

 

Why don't we just trade everyone...then we'll become the Padres.

 

Nobody said they wanted to trade all those guys to get Peavy.

[SweetZombieJesus]

As much as I would love to add Peavy, we now have posters suggesting we trade Lee, DeRosa, Wuertz, and Cotts which would open at least 3 new holes on the team.

Assuming Marshall is part of a deal, the Cubs would have no lefties in the bullpen with the trade of Cotts. Hoffpauir has a possible future as a pinch hitter/DH, but not as a starter. As for DeRosa, he quite possibly was our 3rd MVP on the team. Let's not forget that the rotation goes into 2009 better than the 2008 rotation which lead the Cubs to over 90 wins. If we can acquire Peavy using spare parts and prospects, fine. If not, move on and fill the other holes on the team.

 

Cotts and Wuertz have no business getting being a barrier in getting peavy. Same with Kevin Hart.

[jmajew]

I don't understand. Why is everyone obsessed with Jake Peavy. A rotation of Zambrano, Harden, Lilly, Dempster, Marquis/Marshall/Hill/Samardizja is pretty good. Our biggest glaring holes are at the top of the order and in RF. We need to be focusing on the biggest needs.

[17 Seconds]

I don't understand. Why is everyone obsessed with Jake Peavy. A rotation of Zambrano, Harden, Lilly, Dempster, Marquis/Marshall/Hill/Samardizja is pretty good. Our biggest glaring holes are at the top of the order and in RF. We need to be focusing on the biggest needs.

 

You can never have too much starting pithcing.

 

That rotation is dependent On Harden and Dempster pitching like number 2-3 starters, and that kind of worries me. Harden is pretty much a lock to miss significant time and if Dempster turns back to normal the rotation could be a mess.

[SweetZombieJesus]

I don't understand. Why is everyone obsessed with Jake Peavy. A rotation of Zambrano, Harden, Lilly, Dempster, Marquis/Marshall/Hill/Samardizja is pretty good. Our biggest glaring holes are at the top of the order and in RF. We need to be focusing on the biggest needs.

 

He's better than any of those guys in most cases alot better.

[RynoRules]

Last year, the package the Twins got for Santana didn't look all that great which gives hope that the Cubs can put something together for Peavy.

 

Pie, Vitters, Hill, Cedeno, Theriot, Wuertz and Marquis + cash for Peavy and Greene.

 

Wow, talk about gutting the farm system ..

 

I heard an interview with Gary Hughes on XM yesterday. He said the Cubs are in all out win now mode. I guess they figure the new owner will give them the money they need to rebuild the farm down the road.

 

They should be in that mode at all-times. No reason for a team with their resources to ever be in a re-building mode. They should be able to scout and draft well and make efficient use of salary on the ML level at the same time.

[carolinacubbie]

I don't understand. Why is everyone obsessed with Jake Peavy. A rotation of Zambrano, Harden, Lilly, Dempster, Marquis/Marshall/Hill/Samardizja is pretty good. Our biggest glaring holes are at the top of the order and in RF. We need to be focusing on the biggest needs.

 

He's better than any of those guys in most cases alot better.

 

 

His ERA on the road has been over 4.20 2 of the last 3 years. Granted I still think he is a great pitcher, but he isn't worth risking the whole team over. In case everyone missed it, this team was pretty damn good last year. We just didn't come to play for three games. That happens sometimes. IF we can get Peavy, and not have to give up an important piece of the lineup than I'm all for it. I just don't see that being the case. I still think the solution to me would be move DeRosa to RF and trade for Brian Roberts. Get another LHP for the pen, and try and get Burnett.

[anabiono]

there is no way we are getting burnett

[cubsfan26]

there is no way we are getting burnett

 

 

Yeah I heard Burnett is only accepting five year deals, and would probably cost more then Peavy per year. I think the rotation is pretty much set unless they can get a pitcher like Peavy, or Randy Johnson at a reasonable price.

[C.C.]

there is no way we are getting burnett

 

No way we are getting Peavy either.

[davearm2]

there is no way we are getting burnett

Why would you say that?

 

Peavy has 5 years and $81M left on his deal (assuming he would insist on the option year being guaranteed to waive the NTC), and Hendry's seemingly working his butt off to try and trade for him.

 

Burnett is reportedly looking for a 5-year deal in the $80M range (and so far the hangup seems to be that nobody's willing to go 5 years).

 

Sounds to me like if Hendry would be willing to give Burnett the same contract Peavy's already got, then he'd probably have himself a deal.

[haubrich91]

So everyone now wants to trade Zambrano, Lee, DeRosa and others just to get Peavy?

 

Why don't we just trade everyone...then we'll become the Padres.

 

Nobody said they wanted to trade all those guys to get Peavy.

 

Well technically, yes they did. Not to the Padres, but to other teams to clear payroll to get Peavy.

[C.C.]

there is no way we are getting burnett

Why would you say that?

 

Peavy has 5 years and $81M left on his deal (assuming he would insist on the option year being guaranteed to waive the NTC), and Hendry's seemingly working his butt off to try and trade for him.

 

Burnett is reportedly looking for a 5-year deal in the $80M range (and so far the hangup seems to be that nobody's willing to go 5 years).

 

Sounds to me like if Hendry would be willing to give Burnett the same contract Peavy's already got, then he'd probably have himself a deal.

 

Assuming Burnett equates to Peavy talent wise.

[cubsfan26]

I don't think Jim Hendry thinks of Burnett in the same level as he does as Peavy. He's willing to take on Peavy contract, and give up a ton of talent, because he probably feels like he's one of the best pitchers in baseball. While he probably thinks AJ Burnett is more of a middle class pitcher who's never reached his potential. So Hendry wouldn't give Burnett the money he would be willing to give Peavy.

[Backtobanks]

For all of you that want to trade Lee, tell me who is going to play 1B with decent numbers, great defense, and a much-cheaper contract and is available. Also, let's not overlook the number of errors Lee saves on throws from ARam and Theriot. As for "selling high" on DeRosa, I think it would be impossible to get equal value for him from any team. Getting prospects to flip for Peavy would give us a fabulous rotation that would lead the league in unearned runs.

[17 Seconds]

For all of you that want to trade Lee, tell me who is going to play 1B with decent numbers, great defense, and a much-cheaper contract and is available. Also, let's not overlook the number of errors Lee saves on throws from ARam and Theriot. As for "selling high" on DeRosa, I think it would be impossible to get equal value for him from any team. Getting prospects to flip for Peavy would give us a fabulous rotation that would lead the league in unearned runs.

 

lawl so we'd lead the league in unearned runs just from losing Lee? The truth is that if he hits like last season it doesn't matter how good his defense is.

[anabiono]

For all of you that want to trade Lee, tell me who is going to play 1B with decent numbers, great defense, and a much-cheaper contract and is available. Also, let's not overlook the number of errors Lee saves on throws from ARam and Theriot. As for "selling high" on DeRosa, I think it would be impossible to get equal value for him from any team. Getting prospects to flip for Peavy would give us a fabulous rotation that would lead the league in unearned runs.

 

lawl so we'd lead the league in unearned runs just from losing Lee? The truth is that if he hits like last season it doesn't matter how good his defense is.

 

not really actually...i think both of you are walking along the edge just a little here

[17 Seconds]

For all of you that want to trade Lee, tell me who is going to play 1B with decent numbers, great defense, and a much-cheaper contract and is available. Also, let's not overlook the number of errors Lee saves on throws from ARam and Theriot. As for "selling high" on DeRosa, I think it would be impossible to get equal value for him from any team. Getting prospects to flip for Peavy would give us a fabulous rotation that would lead the league in unearned runs.

 

lawl so we'd lead the league in unearned runs just from losing Lee? The truth is that if he hits like last season it doesn't matter how good his defense is.

 

not really actually...i think both of you are walking along the edge just a little here

 

Not really what? When you have an .825 OPS (.790 after May 1) at first base you better be a supernatural defender to be earning 13 mil a year. Besides, Lee's defense wasn't even all that great last season. It was good but not what we're used to seeing. That's not really the point though, the point is his offense. If you're a 13 million dollar first baseman you better damn well better exceed an .825 OPS. You can argue that he'll bounce back.... I'm just saying that if he performs like he did in 2008, that's not hard to replace.

[imb]

teix is a better defender than lee, anyway, and isnt he the reason to get rid of lee in the first place