Trade Market for Z

[Backtobanks]

Something to keep the hot stove running I guess...From mlbtraderumors.com

 

By Tim Dierkes [December 28 at 4:45pm CST]

 

Links for Monday...

 

* A week ago, we heard conflicting reports about whether or not the Yankees had talked to the Cubs about acquiring Carlos Zambrano. SI.com's Jon Heyman reports, via Twitter, that the Yankees "definitely" inquired, and speculates that Zambrano is "eminently available."

 

 

How about a deal with the Mets:

 

Zambrano + Berg/Stevens + Fuld/Colvin + Blanco/Lee (ss) for Reyes + Pelfrey/Maine + Pagan

We'd probably have to take Perez's contract back in this situation, Mets are rather strapped for cash and can't be bringing in another $15+ mil. contract annually when they would be giving up players who all have modest to small contracts.[/quote]

 

 

So much for the idea the Mets are "strapped for cash". They awaiting a physical on Jason Bay.

[SouthSideRyan]

Because the Cubs signed Grabow to some stupid contract and are going to pay some CF some stupid amount of money, does that mean they aren't strapped for cash?

[davell]

I'm kind of wanting to hear how Blanco and Lee are comparable value-wise......

[Sever82]

Wow, do people actually believe garbage like this:

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/316076-mets-closing-in-on-bay-molina-zambrano

 

I mean really, the cubs talked to the yankees about Zambrano and probably asked for Melky and a couple other players for Z but yet this post is suggesting they'll settle for Castillo and a young player which probably means a prospect, unless that young player is Jose Reyes, i highly doubt the cubs would trade Z for a package that is Castillo as the centerpiece. If they do, Hendry needs to be fired on the spot.

[davell]

Granted, I think there is NOTHING to that rumor about Z, but would a Castillo/Ike Davis for Z trade be all that bad? Davis would give us Lee's eventual replacement and Castillo could play 2B for us for the next 2 years, I suppose......The main thing here though, is the money saved from Z. You could go out and sign either Sheets or Bedard as a one year replacement and see if they recapture what they once were. Either way, after the 2010 season, you have more money freed up, to either re-sign Bedard or Sheets, or go after a different big name, if thats what you want to do. Like I said, I see nothing coming out of this article, but doing something like that may not even make us worse in the shortterm and it puts us in much better position for the future as well.

[Sever82]

Granted, I think there is NOTHING to that rumor about Z, but would a Castillo/Ike Davis for Z trade be all that bad? Davis would give us Lee's eventual replacement and Castillo could play 2B for us for the next 2 years, I suppose......The main thing here though, is the money saved from Z. You could go out and sign either Sheets or Bedard as a one year replacement and see if they recapture what they once were. Either way, after the 2010 season, you have more money freed up, to either re-sign Bedard or Sheets, or go after a different big name, if thats what you want to do. Like I said, I see nothing coming out of this article, but doing something like that may not even make us worse in the shortterm and it puts us in much better position for the future as well.

 

I like the money you save by trading Z but this isn't the NBA where the cubs are trying to save Cap Space. There isn't anything out in the FA market that is as young and productive as big Z. I mean yeah Big Z is overpaid at this point but why would you trade him for garbage just to free up payroll when there isnt anything out there to use your payroll on. Best bet for the cubs would be to wait on trading Z maybe until next offseason and hope he has a great year this year to build his value. Lets say Z has a 19-8 with an ERA close or below 3 and 200+ innings and 150+ks season. With the free agent class coming up, you could then package Z to maybe the Red Sox, Yankees, Dodgers, etc. and acquire something of real value plus use the money to maybe sign Crawford or another big name FA.

[Backtobanks]

Any trade of Zambrano would have to include a decent young starter to step into the rotation immediately.

[SCCubbieFAN]

Any trade of Zambrano would have to include a decent young starter to step into the rotation immediately.

 

And u also have to figure in he may want some incentive (extension) to waive his ntc.

[CUBZ99]

Granted, I think there is NOTHING to that rumor about Z, but would a Castillo/Ike Davis for Z trade be all that bad? Davis would give us Lee's eventual replacement and Castillo could play 2B for us for the next 2 years, I suppose......The main thing here though, is the money saved from Z. You could go out and sign either Sheets or Bedard as a one year replacement and see if they recapture what they once were. Either way, after the 2010 season, you have more money freed up, to either re-sign Bedard or Sheets, or go after a different big name, if thats what you want to do. Like I said, I see nothing coming out of this article, but doing something like that may not even make us worse in the shortterm and it puts us in much better position for the future as well.

 

The Cubs rotation would be pretty pitiful without Z. And even if they made it to the playoffs, they wouldn't have a shut down guy they could go to.

[Sever82]

Any trade of Zambrano would have to include a decent young starter to step into the rotation immediately.

 

And u also have to figure in he may want some incentive (extension) to waive his ntc.

 

I highly doubt that. He has plenty of years remaining on his deal, there is no team in the world that would extend his deal if he already has a few more years remaining on it and i'm pretty sure Z's agent knows this. This isn't a roy halladay situatin in which Z's contract is up after this year.

[davell]

Granted, I think there is NOTHING to that rumor about Z, but would a Castillo/Ike Davis for Z trade be all that bad? Davis would give us Lee's eventual replacement and Castillo could play 2B for us for the next 2 years, I suppose......The main thing here though, is the money saved from Z. You could go out and sign either Sheets or Bedard as a one year replacement and see if they recapture what they once were. Either way, after the 2010 season, you have more money freed up, to either re-sign Bedard or Sheets, or go after a different big name, if thats what you want to do. Like I said, I see nothing coming out of this article, but doing something like that may not even make us worse in the shortterm and it puts us in much better position for the future as well.

 

The Cubs rotation would be pretty pitiful without Z. And even if they made it to the playoffs, they wouldn't have a shut down guy they could go to.

 

In my scenario though, isn't a healthy Bedard or Sheets close to what Z brings to the table? Hell, if the injury issues scare us too much, why not sign them BOTH? Salary-wise, we'd be losing about 11 mill a year by dealing Z. My guess is you could get both Bedard and Sheets for about 16-18 mill combined(no way do I see Sheets getting the 12 or so he's wanting) Right now, our payroll committments seem to be around 128 mill or. After trading Z, taking on Castillo and signing both Sheets AND Bedard, it would put us around 133-135 mill, leaving us with maybe 8-10 mill to sign or trade for a CF and a bullpen guy.....

[Backtobanks]

It would never happen, but how about a deal centered around Zambrano for Brian Roberts. Throw in a few other names (Pie?, prospects, etc.) and figure out the money ($54 million over 3 years for Zambrano and $40 million over 4 years for Roberts). Of course waiting for MacPhail and Angelos to approve the deal would take at least 2 years. =D>

[Sever82]

It would never happen, but how about a deal centered around Zambrano for Brian Roberts. Throw in a few other names (Pie?, prospects, etc.) and figure out the money ($54 million over 3 years for Zambrano and $40 million over 4 years for Roberts). Of course waiting for MacPhail and Angelos to approve the deal would take at least 2 years. =D>

 

Never would happen, Z wouldn't waive his no trade for Baltimore. I think the teams he would waive it to, are actually all options. The Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, Red Sox and a long shot would be the White Sox. Z would definitely waive his no trade for the White Sox but i doubt JR would take on his contract. Ozzie would probably convince them about Z's attitude.

[Prizefight]

Not sure if this is new thread worthy, probably not. It was reported on one of the updates on I believe 670 that they are dangling Zambrano to the Mets and it might be a team he waives his no trade clause since they already have 2 Venezuelan players.

 

 

Who would we want? Reyes? KRod? One of those plus prospects?

 

Zambrano/Riot for Reyes/KRod :-)) :-))

[Backtobanks]

It would never happen, but how about a deal centered around Zambrano for Brian Roberts. Throw in a few other names (Pie?, prospects, etc.) and figure out the money ($54 million over 3 years for Zambrano and $40 million over 4 years for Roberts). Of course waiting for MacPhail and Angelos to approve the deal would take at least 2 years. =D>

 

Never would happen, Z wouldn't waive his no trade for Baltimore. I think the teams he would waive it to, are actually all options. The Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, Red Sox and a long shot would be the White Sox. Z would definitely waive his no trade for the White Sox but i doubt JR would take on his contract. Ozzie would probably convince them about Z's attitude.

 

I don't believe all of these stories about cash-strapped teams (except the Cubs), but all of those teams you mentioned are supposedly maxed-out on their budget. Of course, the Mets were "cash-strapped" and then signed Bay to a contract for more than $16 million per year.

[jersey cubs fan]

I saw a headline on the trib saying Hendry declines to comment on Zambrano rumors.

 

 

I can't imagine what this rotation would look like minus Harden and Zambrano.

 

Dempster becomes your most reliable starter entering the season.

[erik316wttn]

I saw a headline on the trib saying Hendry declines to comment on Zambrano rumors.

 

 

I can't imagine what this rotation would look like minus Harden and Zambrano.

 

Dempster becomes your most reliable starter entering the season.

 

That's a scary thought.

 

This team can't afford to trade Zambrano at this point, unless it's an offer that Hendry would be an absolute idiot to turn down.

[Sever82]

I saw a headline on the trib saying Hendry declines to comment on Zambrano rumors.

 

 

I can't imagine what this rotation would look like minus Harden and Zambrano.

 

Dempster becomes your most reliable starter entering the season.

 

That's a scary thought.

 

This team can't afford to trade Zambrano at this point, unless it's an offer that Hendry would be an absolute idiot to turn down.

 

Can't imagine Hendry dealing Z without having a replacement in mind. whether is getting a young pitcher back or trading Z and signing Sheets.

[dew1679666265]

I saw a headline on the trib saying Hendry declines to comment on Zambrano rumors.

 

 

I can't imagine what this rotation would look like minus Harden and Zambrano.

 

Dempster becomes your most reliable starter entering the season.

 

Most reliable has been Lilly, unless you're not considering him because of the injury.

[Guest]

It would never happen, but how about a deal centered around Zambrano for Brian Roberts. Throw in a few other names (Pie?, prospects, etc.) and figure out the money ($54 million over 3 years for Zambrano and $40 million over 4 years for Roberts). Of course waiting for MacPhail and Angelos to approve the deal would take at least 2 years. =D>

 

Never would happen, Z wouldn't waive his no trade for Baltimore. I think the teams he would waive it to, are actually all options. The Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, Red Sox and a long shot would be the White Sox. Z would definitely waive his no trade for the White Sox but i doubt JR would take on his contract. Ozzie would probably convince them about Z's attitude.

 

I don't believe all of these stories about cash-strapped teams (except the Cubs), but all of those teams you mentioned are supposedly maxed-out on their budget. Of course, the Mets were "cash-strapped" and then signed Bay to a contract for more than $16 million per year.

 

You don't think that these corporate execs that own sports franchises haven't taken a huge loss during the more recent market collapse? Sure, they'll probably make it all back at some point and then more on top of that, but I can assure you it isn't just about team payrolls. It's about the economy in general. It's about drops in season ticket holders, receiving less advertising dollars, etc....

[Backtobanks]

It would never happen, but how about a deal centered around Zambrano for Brian Roberts. Throw in a few other names (Pie?, prospects, etc.) and figure out the money ($54 million over 3 years for Zambrano and $40 million over 4 years for Roberts). Of course waiting for MacPhail and Angelos to approve the deal would take at least 2 years. =D>

 

Never would happen, Z wouldn't waive his no trade for Baltimore. I think the teams he would waive it to, are actually all options. The Dodgers, Yankees, Mets, Red Sox and a long shot would be the White Sox. Z would definitely waive his no trade for the White Sox but i doubt JR would take on his contract. Ozzie would probably convince them about Z's attitude.

 

I don't believe all of these stories about cash-strapped teams (except the Cubs), but all of those teams you mentioned are supposedly maxed-out on their budget. Of course, the Mets were "cash-strapped" and then signed Bay to a contract for more than $16 million per year.

 

You don't think that these corporate execs that own sports franchises haven't taken a huge loss during the more recent market collapse? Sure, they'll probably make it all back at some point and then more on top of that, but I can assure you it isn't just about team payrolls. It's about the economy in general. It's about drops in season ticket holders, receiving less advertising dollars, etc....

 

I understand the pitiful economy, but these owners write off all of these multi-million contracts and any other kind of loss. As bad as the economy is, just watch the line form when one of these franchises goes up for sale. None of these owners "lose" money on their franchises and most make a gigantic return on their investment.

[jersey cubs fan]

I understand the pitiful economy, but these owners write off all of these multi-million contracts and any other kind of loss. As bad as the economy is, just watch the line form when one of these franchises goes up for sale. None of these owners "lose" money on their franchises and most make a gigantic return on their investment.

 

Kramer, is that you?

 

When Zell purchased the Tribune, the Cubs were reported to be worth $1B, they sold for much less two years later.

[Guest]

I understand the pitiful economy, but these owners write off all of these multi-million contracts and any other kind of loss. As bad as the economy is, just watch the line form when one of these franchises goes up for sale. None of these owners "lose" money on their franchises and most make a gigantic return on their investment.

 

Apparently you don't understand the pitiful economy. Do you think all of these owners have a ton of money available to throw at Matt Holliday, Jason Bay and the like, but are crying foul so their team can suck this year while they pocket all the cash instead?

 

The one example you used was one of the biggest market teams in the entire league (the Mets).

 

How much the team might be worth today or tomorrow doesn't really have anything to do with having available money to increase the budget to field a winning team. Throwing money around isn't necessarily the recipe for success anyway. Just ask Jim Hendry. It's quite possible some of these other team owners are tired of watching teams like Florida and Tampa and San Diego put teams in the playoffs with much smaller payrolls. Couple in the tough economic times, and now seems like a great time to change the philosophy of spending on scouting and coaching and drafting to build your team rather than buying someone else's castaways.

[Backtobanks]

I understand the pitiful economy, but these owners write off all of these multi-million contracts and any other kind of loss. As bad as the economy is, just watch the line form when one of these franchises goes up for sale. None of these owners "lose" money on their franchises and most make a gigantic return on their investment.

 

Kramer, is that you?

 

When Zell purchased the Tribune, the Cubs were reported to be worth $1B, they sold for much less two years later.

 

The Tribune bought them for $20 million in the 80's, so they turned a pretty good profit on their investment. Also, what the Cubs were reported to be worth is different than what they were really worth.

[jersey cubs fan]

I understand the pitiful economy, but these owners write off all of these multi-million contracts and any other kind of loss. As bad as the economy is, just watch the line form when one of these franchises goes up for sale. None of these owners "lose" money on their franchises and most make a gigantic return on their investment.

 

Kramer, is that you?

 

When Zell purchased the Tribune, the Cubs were reported to be worth $1B, they sold for much less two years later.

 

The Tribune bought them for $20 million in the 80's, so they turned a pretty good profit on their investment. Also, what the Cubs were reported to be worth is different than what they were really worth.

 

And those profits were gained long ago. There is no guarantee that the next generation will provide even greater value for sports franchises. It's a huge financial risk these people are taking, and there are plenty of situations where it's a money losing venture.