Re: Peavy High on Cubs Wish List

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The Cubs and Padres "have a basic framework in place" for a Jake Peavy deal built around third baseman Josh Vitters. Things may pick up after the Cubs' ownership situation is resolved.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

 

From Buster Olney.

 

Just as Davearm2 suspected. I think the deal gets done at the Winter meetings.

Good news, when you have the opportunity to acquire a pitcher of Peavy's caliber you do everything you can and that includes possibly trading your top prospect(s). For as much as I hate to give up Vitters this is a move that has to get done, especially with how the Cubs are in a win now mode and by the time Vitters would be up, sept. of 2010 at the earliest but most likely and realistically 2011 or 2012 we may not have as strong a team. What a rotation...

 

Peavy

Z

Dempster

Lilly

Harden

:yahoo: \:D/ :yahoo: \:D/

 

Odds that no one in that rotation both pitches 25 starts and has an ERA better than 3.6?

[rchap24]

The Cubs and Padres "have a basic framework in place" for a Jake Peavy deal built around third baseman Josh Vitters. Things may pick up after the Cubs' ownership situation is resolved.

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

 

From Buster Olney.

 

Just as Davearm2 suspected. I think the deal gets done at the Winter meetings.

Good news, when you have the opportunity to acquire a pitcher of Peavy's caliber you do everything you can and that includes possibly trading your top prospect(s). For as much as I hate to give up Vitters this is a move that has to get done, especially with how the Cubs are in a win now mode and by the time Vitters would be up, sept. of 2010 at the earliest but most likely and realistically 2011 or 2012 we may not have as strong a team. What a rotation...

 

Peavy

Z

Dempster

Lilly

Harden

:yahoo: \:D/ :yahoo: \:D/

 

Odds that no one in that rotation both pitches 25 starts and has an ERA better than 3.6?

 

That would be one of the most dominating rotations of all time

[Cubswin11]

Is there any timetable as to when the ownership situation will be "resolved?" Or are they just sifting through this last round of bids and it is only a matter of days until they start exclusively negotiating with one group after the high bidder is decided?

[ctcf]

I would so give up Vitters for Peavy.

[inari]

After the ownership situation is resolves? That could take a long time, no?

[soonercub]

I would love to see the trade for Peavy. Which will probably involve in some way Vitters, Pie, Cedeno and another 1 or 2 lessers.

 

Trade Maquis to the Rockies for Clint Barmes. He can battle Theriot for SS or super sub role.

 

Sign either Abreu or Bradley and call it good. If a decent loogy falls in your lap, take em or maybe a fast defense outfielder for the bench.

 

Rotation (no particular order)

Peavy

Z

Lilly

Demp

Harden

 

Bullpen from below (6)

Marmol

Greg

shark

Guzman

Gaudin

Marshall

Cotts

Wuertz

Hart

Wells

 

OF: Soriano, Fuku/Johnson, Abreu or Bradley

Inf: Soto, Rami, Riot, DeRo, Lee

Bench: K. Hill, Barmes, Fonty, Fuku/Johnson, Hoff and a speedy OF

 

Go young and cheap on the bench, you can always add vets at the deadline.

 

PLAY BALL!!!

[rchap24]

I would love to see the trade for Peavy. Which will probably involve in some way Vitters, Pie, Cedeno and another 1 or 2 lessers.

 

Trade Maquis to the Rockies for Clint Barmes. He can battle Theriot for SS or super sub role.

 

Sign either Abreu or Bradley and call it good. If a decent loogy falls in your lap, take em or maybe a fast defense outfielder for the bench.

 

Rotation (no particular order)

Peavy

Z

Lilly

Demp

Harden

 

Bullpen from below (6)

Marmol

Greg

shark

Guzman

Gaudin

Marshall

Cotts

Wuertz

Hart

Wells

 

OF: Soriano, Fuku/Johnson, Abreu or Bradley

Inf: Soto, Rami, Riot, DeRo, Lee

Bench: K. Hill, Barmes, Fonty, Fuku/Johnson, Hoff and a speedy OF

 

Go young and cheap on the bench, you can always add vets at the deadline.

 

PLAY BALL!!!

 

I'm a fan now will all of that happen?

[Cubswin11]

After the ownership situation is resolves? That could take a long time, no?

That's what I was thinking, but the last round of bids was just done, and after the Trib/Zell figure out who the high bidder is the Cubs can likely go to whoever that is and figure out how much payroll can be added. Once the high bidder is determined I would think negotiations will start in ironing out a deal to buy the Cubs and the high bidder will probably get some input on potential payroll additions that can happen before they actually take over. If the new owners PR department was smart they could spin this Peavy thing as their idea/workings as they would probably like to make a flashy acquisition to show the fans they are serious about winning. What better way to help fans forget last Oct., immediately get support of new ownership, and drive up interest in the Cubs in December (not that there isn't already enough but you get the casual fan interested) by adding a Top 5 pitcher in baseball.

[Butterscup1679666578]

I hate giving up Vitters, but when Peavy is on the table, you do it. Get this ownership crap figured out and lets get this done.

[BigbadB]

I hate giving up Vitters, but when Peavy is on the table, you do it. Get this ownership crap figured out and lets get this done.

 

The Padres will have a nice stockpile of 3b's. Of course, Kouzmanoff will be too pricey for them in another year, so he'll be nontendered when Baltimore won't offer Garrett Olson for him.

[Sever82]

Quick question, lets say you can look into the future a bit and lets say you're about to pull the trigger on a deal that would send Vitters to SD for Peavy. Lets say that all the prospects sent except vitters are duds or average MLB players. Would you do the trade even know that Vitters ends up being a Chipper Jones caliber player? I think my answer would be yes since Peavy is only 27 but if peavy was 32 i'd say a quick no.

[BigbadB]

Quick question, lets say you can look into the future a bit and lets say you're about to pull the trigger on a deal that would send Vitters to SD for Peavy. Lets say that all the prospects sent except vitters are duds or average MLB players. Would you do the trade even know that Vitters ends up being a Chipper Jones caliber player? I think my answer would be yes since Peavy is only 27 but if peavy was 32 i'd say a quick no.

 

Even if Vitters ends up being Chipper Jones caliber, all the Cubs will need to do is wait until Vitters starts to get expensive and then trade for him. The Padres are not a team that are expected to pay that kind of money for their players. Realistically, you get the best years of Peavy, and potentially the best years of Vitters, as well. Win/win.

[Sever82]

true i guess you can say that. I'm honestly hoping the cubs become like the red sox where they're not afraid to buy talent put also develop good talent in their minors. But to do that the cubs need to definitely get better scouting for future talent. I was suprised by Olney's article just because it seems as if he's been pushing Peavy to braves for a while now and basically dismissing the cubs. But i still dont trust anything olney says.

[UMFan83]

I hate giving up Vitters, but when Peavy is on the table, you do it. Get this ownership crap figured out and lets get this done.

 

Exactly. I really hate giving up Vitters. He's as close to a sure thing as we have in this organization, and in 1-2 years he'd likely command much more than being part of a 4 person package for Peavy. But when Peavy is on the table, you do it.

[C.C.]

If they are waiting for the ownership change to be resolved, then the I'm going to say this deal doesn't get done. Or doesn't get done anytime soon.

[Post Count Padder]

The Cubs are speaking daily to the Padres about Jake Peavy. Rosenthal says the Orioles do not seem to be the third team at this time.

[erik316wttn]

So with Vitters as the possible centerpiece of this deal, do we still need the 3rd team to get involved?

[YearofDaCubs]

So with Vitters as the possible centerpiece of this deal, do we still need the 3rd team to get involved?

It definitely sounds like it or else it would have been done already IMO. They are probably looking for one more starting pitcher that they feel is a fit for them in the future and apparently they don't feel Marshall is the guy for that and frankly, I'm surprised about that.

[Post Count Padder]

So with Vitters as the possible centerpiece of this deal, do we still need the 3rd team to get involved?

Yes. The Padres aren't too enthralled with our other prospects.

[Butterscup1679666578]

So with Vitters as the possible centerpiece of this deal, do we still need the 3rd team to get involved?

 

I wouldn't think so. I always felt that the reason we were trying to get a third team involved is because we didn't want to give up Vitters.

 

Edit: guess i'm in the minority, haha

[Cubswin11]

If they are waiting for the ownership change to be resolved, then the I'm going to say this deal doesn't get done. Or doesn't get done anytime soon.

It could mean more that they are waiting to figure out who has the high bid/turns into the front runner to buy the Cubs, I doubt they would wait until everything was agreed upon, signed, turned over. Likely they are just waiting until the likely owner of the three is identified (high bidder most likely) and they will ask him if they can add a Peavy type contract and then proceed.

[Burtonbell]

So with Vitters as the possible centerpiece of this deal, do we still need the 3rd team to get involved?

It definitely sounds like it or else it would have been done already IMO. They are probably looking for one more starting pitcher that they feel is a fit for them in the future and apparently they don't feel Marshall is the guy for that and frankly, I'm surprised about that.

 

I'm thinking Hendry might be saying no to Marshall in the trade due to them wanting him as the swingman and put Shark in the minors to start.

From the Padres perspective what you said makes sense though.

[davearm2]

I don't really buy this mumbo-jumbo about waiting for the ownership situation to be resolved.

 

Crane Kenney has said the Cubs are proceeding with business as usual. I take that to mean that the Cubs' brass has huddled up and emerged with a payroll number for Hendry to work within, just like they do every year.

 

The complication is, Hendry's probably very close to that figure already.

 

So it isn't the ownership situation holding things up. It's Hendry moving a contract or two out of town to free up space for Peavy's $11M.

 

Put it this way, the Cubs ownership situation has been in limbo for quite a while now. That didn't prevent the Dempster signing for $52M. IMO it wouldn't prevent this Peavy trade either, provided Hendry can manage to fit it into the budget he's been handed.

 

In fact if Towers was satisfied with what the Cubs had on the table and a taker for Marquis was identified easily, this thing might've been done a month ago.

[davearm2]

So with Vitters as the possible centerpiece of this deal, do we still need the 3rd team to get involved?

It definitely sounds like it or else it would have been done already IMO. They are probably looking for one more starting pitcher that they feel is a fit for them in the future and apparently they don't feel Marshall is the guy for that and frankly, I'm surprised about that.

 

I'm thinking Hendry might be saying no to Marshall in the trade due to them wanting him as the swingman and put Shark in the minors to start.

From the Padres perspective what you said makes sense though.

Actually I've been operating under the presumption that SD wanted two ML-ready SPs: Marshall is the first, and the Cubs need to source the second from another team since they don't have another of their own to put with Marshall.

 

Now conceivably, Hendry is offering only one of Marshall and Vitters. That's certainly a possibility.

[Jehrico]

So with Vitters as the possible centerpiece of this deal, do we still need the 3rd team to get involved?

It definitely sounds like it or else it would have been done already IMO. They are probably looking for one more starting pitcher that they feel is a fit for them in the future and apparently they don't feel Marshall is the guy for that and frankly, I'm surprised about that.

 

I'm thinking Hendry might be saying no to Marshall in the trade due to them wanting him as the swingman and put Shark in the minors to start.

From the Padres perspective what you said makes sense though.

Actually I've been operating under the presumption that SD wanted two ML-ready SPs: Marshall is the first, and the Cubs need to source the second from another team since they don't have another of their own to put with Marshall.

 

Now conceivably, Hendry is offering only one of Marshall and Vitters. That's certainly a possibility.

I wonder how far off of Marshall Towers views Gaudin...