Can Peavy Thread Re-Open, new news?

[Sever82]

I think the padres could've gotten the best value for peavy in the offseason. Now that all the teams in the MLB know that they're losing money and they can't hide it, they lose a lot of leverage. I mean what are they going to do, hold on to peavy and lose millions? It would be a different story if he didnt have his no trade clause but knowing that he does, their options are very limited. I would imagine a package of Marshall, Vitters, Stevens and Guzman might be enough this time.

[Clem Fandango]

Stark talked to an executive of a team that has Jake Peavy on its radar. This exec noted that teams did not overpay in deals for Rich Harden and Johan Santana, so the Padres may not be able to demand a ridiculous bounty for Peavy.

 

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

 

That's half right. Cubs and the Mets didn't pay outlandish prices for Harden or Santana, but he's wrong in thinking Peavy should go for similar because Harden and Santana were effectively in the last, or next to last years of their contracts, whereas Peavy is locked in for another 4 years. That's why Peavy is gonna go for top talent instead of mid to high grade talent, because whoever he goes to will control him for 4 years.

 

Plus Santana would only agree to be traded if he got an extension, which drove his price way down. Harden had an option year and a laundry list of injuries. Peavy, while IMO not as good as those two pitchers, is in a whole different league when it comes to trade value because of his relatively durable career, top tier pitching talent, and an in place long term contract

[Little Slide Rooter]

Stark talked to an executive of a team that has Jake Peavy on its radar. This exec noted that teams did not overpay in deals for Rich Harden and Johan Santana, so the Padres may not be able to demand a ridiculous bounty for Peavy.

 

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

 

That's half right. Cubs and the Mets didn't pay outlandish prices for Harden or Santana, but he's wrong in thinking Peavy should go for similar because Harden and Santana were effectively in the last, or next to last years of their contracts, whereas Peavy is locked in for another 4 years. That's why Peavy is gonna go for top talent instead of mid to high grade talent, because whoever he goes to will control him for 4 years.

Plus Santana would only agree to be traded if he got an extension, which drove his price way down. Harden had an option year and a laundry list of injuries. Peavy, while IMO not as good as those two pitchers, is in a whole different league when it comes to trade value because of his relatively durable career, top tier pitching talent, and an in place long term contract

 

Well you can count us out then.

 

And Peavy is right up there with Santana and Harden. Say what you will about Peavy pitching in a very pitcher friendly park, as Johan pitched in the Metrodome, which is just as pitcher friendly as Petco.

[Guest]

This has nothing to do with the Peavy rumors but in SI's MLB preview issue, they spelled it "Peavey" three times in the preview for Atlanta.

[Clem Fandango]

Stark talked to an executive of a team that has Jake Peavy on its radar. This exec noted that teams did not overpay in deals for Rich Harden and Johan Santana, so the Padres may not be able to demand a ridiculous bounty for Peavy.

 

 

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/

 

That's half right. Cubs and the Mets didn't pay outlandish prices for Harden or Santana, but he's wrong in thinking Peavy should go for similar because Harden and Santana were effectively in the last, or next to last years of their contracts, whereas Peavy is locked in for another 4 years. That's why Peavy is gonna go for top talent instead of mid to high grade talent, because whoever he goes to will control him for 4 years.

Plus Santana would only agree to be traded if he got an extension, which drove his price way down. Harden had an option year and a laundry list of injuries. Peavy, while IMO not as good as those two pitchers, is in a whole different league when it comes to trade value because of his relatively durable career, top tier pitching talent, and an in place long term contract

 

Well you can count us out then.

 

And Peavy is right up there with Santana and Harden. Say what you will about Peavy pitching in a very pitcher friendly park, as Johan pitched in the Metrodome, which is just as pitcher friendly as Petco.

 

You can't count us out considering reports have said we were mere minutes away from making an official deal for Peavy (or very very close at least). I mean some reports said Peavy was packing his things for Chicago because he was told to. If we give them Vitters, who is a top tier prospect, plus some mid to high end prospects/players like Marshall and what not, we can get it done. But we almost certainly can't get him for say Jay Jackson, Wellington Castillo, and Tyler Colvin. Peavy will yield at least one serious top prospect and some other fringe top end prospects, as opposed to Harden and Santana, who yielded good prospects, but weren't expected to be anything really incredible, and it's due largely in part to Peavy's 4-year contract compared to Harden's injury history/one option year and Santana's contract extension stipulation

 

Also, I wasn't implying Peavy wasn't that good when I said I didn't think he was better than Harden opr Santana, I was merely stating an opinion that I think Harden and Santana are better. Peavy is still a Top 5 pitcher, I just think Harden (when healthy) and Santana are in a league of their own

[Bote McBoteface]

I'd almost prefer not to get Peavy so that we can afford to re-sign Harden at the end this season, assuming Harden stays healthy all year, which isn't a great assumption.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Peavy's four-year deal makes me want him less. If it was two, I'd pay a lot more.

[Jehrico]

I'd almost prefer not to get Peavy so that we can afford to re-sign Harden at the end this season, assuming Harden stays healthy all year, which isn't a great assumption.

There's always the question of Harden being healthy in the future too, even if he does have a healthy season this year. I don't think it's a good assumption that getting Peavy means we can't afford Harden. We've always been good at keeping the elite players we want to keep. The last guy that we really wanted to keep that walked on us was Maddux.

 

That wouldn't stop me from going after Peavy. Get them both for the postseason. Maybe we can keep both, maybe not. If we don't try, we only have one of the two for this postseason, then one of them next year. If we get him, then we have both to try to win the WS this year, and at worst, we only have one of the two next year. Maybe things work out and we keep both.

[dew1679666265]

I'd almost prefer not to get Peavy so that we can afford to re-sign Harden at the end this season, assuming Harden stays healthy all year, which isn't a great assumption.

There's always the question of Harden being healthy in the future too, even if he does have a healthy season this year. I don't think it's a good assumption that getting Peavy means we can't afford Harden. We've always been good at keeping the elite players we want to keep. The last guy that we really wanted to keep that walked on us was Maddux.

 

That wouldn't stop me from going after Peavy. Get them both for the postseason. Maybe we can keep both, maybe not. If we don't try, we only have one of the two for this postseason, then one of them next year. If we get him, then we have both to try to win the WS this year, and at worst, we only have one of the two next year. Maybe things work out and we keep both.

 

Harden's the better pitcher (probably), but due to his health concerns I think I'd prefer to have Peavy for four years. Peavy's more likely to be healthy for the duration than Harden is (effectiveness is another question I guess, but there's no guarantee when/if either pitcher will fall off a cliff).

[dew1679666265]

I guess we can start talking about potential trade bait

Column A

Josh Vitters-probably the key

Column B

Sean Marshall

Aaron Heilman

Angel Guzman

Column C

Tyler Colvin

Jeremy Papelbon

Ryan Flaherty

Andrew Cashner

Wellington Castillo

Jeff Stevens

Keven Hart

the other 2 guys from the DeRosa trade

Column D

Jake Fox-potential throw in

Sam Fuld-potential throw in

Mitch Atkins-potential throw in

 

Id say Vitters+1 of Column B+2 from column C(or 2 from B+1 from C)+1 from column D.

 

I think Atkins may have more value than that. Due to being nearly major league ready he probably belongs in column C even though his upside isn't all that high.

[Jehrico]

I'd almost prefer not to get Peavy so that we can afford to re-sign Harden at the end this season, assuming Harden stays healthy all year, which isn't a great assumption.

There's always the question of Harden being healthy in the future too, even if he does have a healthy season this year. I don't think it's a good assumption that getting Peavy means we can't afford Harden. We've always been good at keeping the elite players we want to keep. The last guy that we really wanted to keep that walked on us was Maddux.

 

That wouldn't stop me from going after Peavy. Get them both for the postseason. Maybe we can keep both, maybe not. If we don't try, we only have one of the two for this postseason, then one of them next year. If we get him, then we have both to try to win the WS this year, and at worst, we only have one of the two next year. Maybe things work out and we keep both.

 

Harden's the better pitcher (probably), but due to his health concerns I think I'd prefer to have Peavy for four years. Peavy's more likely to be healthy for the duration than Harden is (effectiveness is another question I guess, but there's no guarantee when/if either pitcher will fall off a cliff).

I worded my last post badly.

 

The risk of losing Harden for Peavy next year is worth the possibility of having them both for a postseason for sure, and the chance of keeping both beyond that. That, and the part about the health factor you mentioned...

[dew1679666265]

I'd almost prefer not to get Peavy so that we can afford to re-sign Harden at the end this season, assuming Harden stays healthy all year, which isn't a great assumption.

There's always the question of Harden being healthy in the future too, even if he does have a healthy season this year. I don't think it's a good assumption that getting Peavy means we can't afford Harden. We've always been good at keeping the elite players we want to keep. The last guy that we really wanted to keep that walked on us was Maddux.

 

That wouldn't stop me from going after Peavy. Get them both for the postseason. Maybe we can keep both, maybe not. If we don't try, we only have one of the two for this postseason, then one of them next year. If we get him, then we have both to try to win the WS this year, and at worst, we only have one of the two next year. Maybe things work out and we keep both.

 

Harden's the better pitcher (probably), but due to his health concerns I think I'd prefer to have Peavy for four years. Peavy's more likely to be healthy for the duration than Harden is (effectiveness is another question I guess, but there's no guarantee when/if either pitcher will fall off a cliff).

I worded my last post badly.

 

The risk of losing Harden for Peavy next year is worth the possibility of having them both for a postseason for sure, and the chance of keeping both beyond that. That, and the part about the health factor you mentioned...

 

Yeah, I understood what you were saying. My post was more directed at Enn Tea, though, but your post was more easily accessible and I'm lazy. :D

[Cubswin11]

On BBTN this morning, it was hard to tell if he was joking, Gammons said that Cubs scouts were in the stands last night scouting Peavy.

[Little Slide Rooter]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-12-cubs-brite-chicago-apr12,0,2712558.story

 

Speculation that the Brewers could rear their ugly heads again for Peavy. Would Peavy waive his clause to go there though is the question? And what would the Brewers have to give up? probably more than they did for Sabbathia, as Peavy is more than a rent a player. They could end up giving up Gamel, Escobar, and Parra. Then the next few years, what would they do about Hardy and Fielder? I really cant imagine either of them in the Brewers future.

[Cubswin11]

The Brewers rumors started at the end of ST and Melvin (Brewers GM) came out and said they would not pursue a trade for him now or at the deadline. He said they talked to the Padres when Peavy was made available but Peavy wasn't interested in going to the Brewers/the Brewers didn't want to give up 2-3 of their prospects (Gamel/Jeffres/Escobar/Saloman/Lowrie/etc.)

[Little Slide Rooter]

The Brewers rumors started at the end of ST and Melvin (Brewers GM) came out and said they would not pursue a trade for him now or at the deadline. He said they talked to the Padres when Peavy was made available but Peavy wasn't interested in going to the Brewers/the Brewers didn't want to give up 2-3 of their prospects (Gamel/Jeffres/Escobar/Saloman/Lowrie/etc.)

 

If they are in contention in a close race come July, Melvin would likely change his tune.

 

The question is, are they expecting to lose Fielder, Hardy, and Weeks in the next few years and build around Braun, Hart, Gamel, and Escobar, or are they going to try to keep their current window open and try to resign at least to of F/H/W. If they are in that second frame of mind, I could see them going after Peavy.

[shnsajax]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-12-cubs-brite-chicago-apr12,0,2712558.story

 

Speculation that the Brewers could rear their ugly heads again for Peavy. Would Peavy waive his clause to go there though is the question? And what would the Brewers have to give up? probably more than they did for Sabbathia, as Peavy is more than a rent a player. They could end up giving up Gamel, Escobar, and Parra. Then the next few years, what would they do about Hardy and Fielder? I really cant imagine either of them in the Brewers future.

 

Which is exactly why they shouldn't trade the future for Peavy. If anything they should trade Fielder for additional players.

[cubsfan26]

Peavy won't be a Brewer because

 

1. He probably doesn't wanna go there

2. They can't afford his big contract

3. He's gonna want to have a full no-trade clause

[Little Slide Rooter]

I wonder if Jeff Samardjzia would be enoug of a deal breaker with Vitters and Marshall to get this thing done. I know Shark has that NTC, but would he be willing to waive it if the Pads promised to start him off on the big league team and maybe even a shot at the rotation?

[CubColtPacer]

I wonder if Jeff Samardjzia would be enoug of a deal breaker with Vitters and Marshall to get this thing done. I know Shark has that NTC, but would he be willing to waive it if the Pads promised to start him off on the big league team and maybe even a shot at the rotation?

 

Samardzija has said that he won't waive his NTC no matter what. It was the fact that Chicago was so close to his home that pushed him to go exclusively baseball in the first place.

[Jehrico]

Not that I wouldn't do it, but I'd be hesitant to send both Shark and Marshall over for Peavy. Peavy, Z, and Harden all had arm problems of some sort last year. Dempster is a TJ reclamation project and only has one starting season under his belt since then. No way we get Peavy without giving up Marshall. So that leaves Shark as our depth. I don't like the idea of Atkins or someone like that being our first backup at SP, as it's inevitable we'll need at least one, if not two fill ins at some point in the season.

[17 Seconds]

Peavy won't be a Brewer because

 

1. He probably doesn't wanna go there

2. They can't afford his big contract

3. He's gonna want to have a full no-trade clause

 

They offered CC 6/100 so if they like Peavy enough, they could afford him.

[RedFlash]

Peavy won't be a Brewer because

 

1. He probably doesn't wanna go there

2. They can't afford his big contract

3. He's gonna want to have a full no-trade clause

 

They offered CC 6/100 so if they like Peavy enough, they could afford him.

 

IMO, that was a "token offer" by the Brewers. They knew "only" $100 mill wasn't going to be enough to lure CC to stay. To me the Brewers offering that contract was nothing more then spin by the FO to tell the fans we tried, but he simply wanted more then what we could afford. IMO, it's the right decision for Milwaukee.

[biittner77]

Not that I wouldn't do it, but I'd be hesitant to send both Shark and Marshall over for Peavy. Peavy, Z, and Harden all had arm problems of some sort last year. Dempster is a TJ reclamation project and only has one starting season under his belt since then. No way we get Peavy without giving up Marshall. So that leaves Shark as our depth. I don't like the idea of Atkins or someone like that being our first backup at SP, as it's inevitable we'll need at least one, if not two fill ins at some point in the season.

 

On the other hand, if the Cubs got Peavy they'd have arguably 3 #1 caliber starters and 2 solid #2 starters. They could afford to have an actual #5 for a few starts here and there. If 3 of their front line starters get hurt they're dead even if they keep Marshall and Smardz

[Jehrico]

Not that I wouldn't do it, but I'd be hesitant to send both Shark and Marshall over for Peavy. Peavy, Z, and Harden all had arm problems of some sort last year. Dempster is a TJ reclamation project and only has one starting season under his belt since then. No way we get Peavy without giving up Marshall. So that leaves Shark as our depth. I don't like the idea of Atkins or someone like that being our first backup at SP, as it's inevitable we'll need at least one, if not two fill ins at some point in the season.

 

On the other hand, if the Cubs got Peavy they'd have arguably 3 #1 caliber starters and 2 solid #2 starters. They could afford to have an actual #5 for a few starts here and there. If 3 of their front line starters get hurt they're dead even if they keep Marshall and Smardz

Not necessarily. You're assuming that if they all go down, they go down at the same time and for an extended period. We could end up with all three spending time on the DL, but with only a little overlap, throughout the season, and still be in decent shape if we can get league average production from whoever steps up to be the #5 starter when needed.