Levine: Hendry secure but firesale could begin

[CubColtPacer]

I think you have to trade Pena right now, if you can.

 

I think you have to wait for his numbers to start looking a lot more impressive, and then think long and hard about what you are going to do at 1B next year. The Cubs were never going to get Pujols, and the likelihood probably went down with the injury. But they need a 1B next year, regardless.

 

If you are just going to get another fringe prospect, there's really no point.

I really think folks are missing the possibility that the Cubs may be angling to extend Pena.

 

They certainly might be.

 

If they do want to trade him though, I have no idea why they would have a hard time convincing teams. Over 900 OPS each of the last two months. Much better in his career after the All-Star Break than before (.885 after vs .797 before). If they can't convince a team that Pena'a April was a combination of a cold start/April weather, then that is a pretty poor negotiating job.

[soapy]

I think you have to trade Pena right now, if you can.

 

I think you have to wait for his numbers to start looking a lot more impressive, and then think long and hard about what you are going to do at 1B next year. The Cubs were never going to get Pujols, and the likelihood probably went down with the injury. But they need a 1B next year, regardless.

 

If you are just going to get another fringe prospect, there's really no point.

I really think folks are missing the possibility that the Cubs may be angling to extend Pena.

That'd be pretty stupid.

 

Extending him for a year (I don't know if that's really an option) wouldn't be completely stupid. They may not be planning on having Ramirez back next year. Maybe they do something a little outside-the-box and work a deal for H. Ramirez and put him at 3B? Bring back Pena at 1B. I don't know, sort of just thinking out loud.

[CubColtPacer]

Trading Soto right now would be completely idiotic.

 

I'm definitely down with trading Pena. However, I'd also look hard at bringing him back again next year if Pujols/Fielder aren't going to be options. I assume he's still not going to be in a position to demand a long-term deal, unless he goes crazy the rest of the season.

 

I'd be surprised if Pena couldn't get a multi-year deal if he wanted it. He'll probably end up in the 825-850 OPS range with good defense and 25-35 homers. That will be a big change from last year with both the disappointing year and possible injury concerns.

[JimSorgi]

I think you have to trade Pena right now, if you can.

 

I think you have to wait for his numbers to start looking a lot more impressive, and then think long and hard about what you are going to do at 1B next year. The Cubs were never going to get Pujols, and the likelihood probably went down with the injury. But they need a 1B next year, regardless.

 

If you are just going to get another fringe prospect, there's really no point.

I really think folks are missing the possibility that the Cubs may be angling to extend Pena.

That'd be pretty stupid.

 

Extending him for a year (I don't know if that's really an option) wouldn't be completely stupid. They may not be planning on having Ramirez back next year. Maybe they do something a little outside-the-box and work a deal for H. Ramirez and put him at 3B? Bring back Pena at 1B. I don't know, sort of just thinking out loud.

 

One year wouldn't be a problem, but I would expect an extension to be multiple years.

[soapy]

Trading Soto right now would be completely idiotic.

 

I'm definitely down with trading Pena. However, I'd also look hard at bringing him back again next year if Pujols/Fielder aren't going to be options. I assume he's still not going to be in a position to demand a long-term deal, unless he goes crazy the rest of the season.

 

I'd be surprised if Pena couldn't get a multi-year deal if he wanted it. He'll probably end up in the 825-850 OPS range with good defense and 25-35 homers. That will be a big change from last year with both the disappointing year and possible injury concerns.

 

Well, I guess I wonder with "multi-year" is. I could see him getting 2-3 years, but I wouldn't consider that "long-term".

[soapy]

One year wouldn't be a problem, but I would expect an extension to be multiple years.

 

Would you extend him for two? I would consider it, but I was drinking at lunch.

[Guest]

I think you have to trade Pena right now, if you can.

 

I think you have to wait for his numbers to start looking a lot more impressive, and then think long and hard about what you are going to do at 1B next year. The Cubs were never going to get Pujols, and the likelihood probably went down with the injury. But they need a 1B next year, regardless.

 

If you are just going to get another fringe prospect, there's really no point.

 

 

So you're saying that Pena isn't good enough to bring anything in trade, but we should consider him an option at 1B going forward?

 

Lee had a .251/.335/.416/.751 line when he was dealt last year, and he wasn't trending in any general direction. Pena is hitting .220/.350/.440/.790 and has a .922 OPS since May 1. He doesn't have a prohibitive contract, plays great defense, is a great clubhouse guy, etc. If he keeps this up, or even falls off to a .850 OPS pace or so, he'll still have plenty of value at the deadline to make trading him worthwhile.

[CubColtPacer]

Trading Soto right now would be completely idiotic.

 

I'm definitely down with trading Pena. However, I'd also look hard at bringing him back again next year if Pujols/Fielder aren't going to be options. I assume he's still not going to be in a position to demand a long-term deal, unless he goes crazy the rest of the season.

 

I'd be surprised if Pena couldn't get a multi-year deal if he wanted it. He'll probably end up in the 825-850 OPS range with good defense and 25-35 homers. That will be a big change from last year with both the disappointing year and possible injury concerns.

 

Well, I guess I wonder with "multi-year" is. I could see him getting 2-3 years, but I wouldn't consider that "long-term".

 

For his age 3 years is a long-term deal. I would think he'd get either 2-3 years on a deal.

[jersey cubs fan]

If they do want to trade him though, I have no idea why they would have a hard time convincing teams. Over 900 OPS each of the last two months. Much better in his career after the All-Star Break than before (.885 after vs .797 before). If they can't convince a team that Pena'a April was a combination of a cold start/April weather, then that is a pretty poor negotiating job.

 

If he stays hot through July it shouldn't be a problem, but that is still up for debate. And you have to get more than the mediocrity they've gotten for some other veteran dumps in recent years. I just don't see the point in acquiring more filler for the system. If they can get a potential impact player, terrific. If he was blocking somebody there could be motivation for moving him for the sake of moving him, but he's not even close to blocking somebody already in the system.

[JimSorgi]

One year wouldn't be a problem, but I would expect an extension to be multiple years.

 

Would you extend him for two? I would consider it, but I was drinking at lunch.

I guess it wouldn't be out of the question, but I'd rather trade him and go after Fielder or Pujols(though who knows about his health).

[Sammy Sofa]

If they do want to trade him though, I have no idea why they would have a hard time convincing teams. Over 900 OPS each of the last two months. Much better in his career after the All-Star Break than before (.885 after vs .797 before). If they can't convince a team that Pena'a April was a combination of a cold start/April weather, then that is a pretty poor negotiating job.

 

If he stays hot through July it shouldn't be a problem, but that is still up for debate. And you have to get more than the mediocrity they've gotten for some other veteran dumps in recent years. I just don't see the point in acquiring more filler for the system. If they can get a potential impact player, terrific. If he was blocking somebody there could be motivation for moving him for the sake of moving him, but he's not even close to blocking somebody already in the system.

 

I can see gooney's point. I think the Cubs can get a good return for him if he keeps things up until the deadline, but if the deal isn't there then why do it just to do it?

[jersey cubs fan]

So you're saying that Pena isn't good enough to bring anything in trade, but we should consider him an option at 1B going forward?

 

Lee had a .251/.335/.416/.751 line when he was dealt last year, and he wasn't trending in any general direction. Pena is hitting .220/.350/.440/.790 and has a .922 OPS since May 1. He doesn't have a prohibitive contract, plays great defense, is a great clubhouse guy, etc. If he keeps this up, or even falls off to a .850 OPS pace or so, he'll still have plenty of value at the deadline to make trading him worthwhile.

 

I'm saying he probably hasn't done enough yet this year to get something worthwhile right now, and unless you can get an impact player in return there's really no point in trading him. And yes, with the absolute lack of both impact bats and potential 1B in the system he has value to the team as a potential option in 2012.

[Guest]

I can see gooney's point. I think the Cubs can get a good return for him if he keeps things up until the deadline, but if the deal isn't there then why do it just to do it?

 

Because Pena hasn't been consistent, and his good years haven't been elite(2007 excepted). There's just not much separating him from several other shorter-term options available to fill 1B in the offseason. If I can trade Carlos Pena in July and still potentially bring him back, aces for me, I like the guy. But if I can add value to the organization by trading him and still get Pena's value elsewhere for next year, then why not trade him?

[Sammy Sofa]

I can see gooney's point. I think the Cubs can get a good return for him if he keeps things up until the deadline, but if the deal isn't there then why do it just to do it?

 

Because Pena hasn't been consistent, and his good years haven't been elite(2007 excepted). There's just not much separating him from several other shorter-term options available to fill 1B in the offseason. If I can trade Carlos Pena in July and still potentially bring him back, aces for me, I like the guy. But if I can add value to the organization by trading him and still get Pena's value elsewhere for next year, then why not trade him?

 

I think the key is adding value to the organization. If nobody is offering anything beyond middling prospects I can see the Cubs holding on to him since they don't have anyone else even remotely close to take over 1B for the rest of the season. That said, I think Pena can net more than that.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I found this on MLBTR

 

The Red Sox may consider pursuing a right-handed hitting outfielder, since there’s some concern about Mike Cameron. Gammons mentions Jeff Baker of the Cubs and Ryan Spilborghs of the Rockies as possible targets for Boston.

 

If they want Baker, more power to them. Reed Johnson might be a good target as well. However, we might consider offering Marlon Byrd as well.

[Guest]

I can see gooney's point. I think the Cubs can get a good return for him if he keeps things up until the deadline, but if the deal isn't there then why do it just to do it?

 

Because Pena hasn't been consistent, and his good years haven't been elite(2007 excepted). There's just not much separating him from several other shorter-term options available to fill 1B in the offseason. If I can trade Carlos Pena in July and still potentially bring him back, aces for me, I like the guy. But if I can add value to the organization by trading him and still get Pena's value elsewhere for next year, then why not trade him?

 

I think the key is adding value to the organization. If nobody is offering anything beyond middling prospects I can see the Cubs holding on to him since they don't have anyone else even remotely close to take over 1B for the rest of the season. That said, I think Pena can net more than that.

Because if you can replace him easily for 2012, but apply the savings of not paying him to signing overslots from the draft, why not do it? If trading Pena and having a different Pena next year means that I can sign Maples & crew, then it's a big win.

[CubColtPacer]

If they do want to trade him though, I have no idea why they would have a hard time convincing teams. Over 900 OPS each of the last two months. Much better in his career after the All-Star Break than before (.885 after vs .797 before). If they can't convince a team that Pena'a April was a combination of a cold start/April weather, then that is a pretty poor negotiating job.

 

If he stays hot through July it shouldn't be a problem, but that is still up for debate. And you have to get more than the mediocrity they've gotten for some other veteran dumps in recent years. I just don't see the point in acquiring more filler for the system. If they can get a potential impact player, terrific. If he was blocking somebody there could be motivation for moving him for the sake of moving him, but he's not even close to blocking somebody already in the system.

 

Because trading for raw prospects pans out sometimes. Ceda and Hart weren't thought of as good prospects when the Cubs acquired them but they were later used as currency in other deals. Murton wasn't a key piece but gave the Cubs a couple pretty good seasons. And I can see the Cubs getting better than that for Pena. They should get 1 guy in the back end of somebody's top 10 and another guy in the top 20 which would be useful to have.

 

The only real benefit I see to keeping him is if you want to offer arbitration. I bet he'll sneak into B level compensation so then you either bring him back or get a draft pick. If they aren't planning on offering arbitration they might as well trade him and either save some money, get some prospects, or both.

[Sammy Sofa]

I found this on MLBTR

 

The Red Sox may consider pursuing a right-handed hitting outfielder, since there’s some concern about Mike Cameron. Gammons mentions Jeff Baker of the Cubs and Ryan Spilborghs of the Rockies as possible targets for Boston.

 

If they want Baker, more power to them. Reed Johnson might be a good target as well. However, we might consider offering Marlon Byrd as well.

 

Actually, Baker is someone they might want to hold on to given the question marks about both 2B and 3B next year.

[Sammy Sofa]

I can see gooney's point. I think the Cubs can get a good return for him if he keeps things up until the deadline, but if the deal isn't there then why do it just to do it?

 

Because Pena hasn't been consistent, and his good years haven't been elite(2007 excepted). There's just not much separating him from several other shorter-term options available to fill 1B in the offseason. If I can trade Carlos Pena in July and still potentially bring him back, aces for me, I like the guy. But if I can add value to the organization by trading him and still get Pena's value elsewhere for next year, then why not trade him?

 

I think the key is adding value to the organization. If nobody is offering anything beyond middling prospects I can see the Cubs holding on to him since they don't have anyone else even remotely close to take over 1B for the rest of the season. That said, I think Pena can net more than that.

Because if you can replace him easily for 2012, but apply the savings of not paying him to signing overslots from the draft, why not do it? If trading Pena and having a different Pena next year means that I can sign Maples & crew, then it's a big win.

 

Hey, I don't have a problem trading Pena, but I can see why the Cubs wouldn't do it.

[MWV]

I think the key is adding value to the organization. If nobody is offering anything beyond middling prospects I can see the Cubs holding on to him since they don't have anyone else even remotely close to take over 1B for the rest of the season. That said, I think Pena can net more than that.

Quade has already demonstrated a willingness to play just about anyone at 1B, irrespective of experience. Baker (30.1 inning ML, 3 G MiL experience prior to 2011), Colvin (no prior experience) and LeMahieu (no prior experience) have already combined to field 92.0 innings at 1B. I don't think the prospect of lacking a legitimate option at the position will dissuade them from dealing Pena. Long term, I agree that they need to address 1B. Short term, it appears Quade will plug in anyone with a glove.

[Sammy Sofa]

I think the key is adding value to the organization. If nobody is offering anything beyond middling prospects I can see the Cubs holding on to him since they don't have anyone else even remotely close to take over 1B for the rest of the season. That said, I think Pena can net more than that.

Quade has already demonstrated a willingness to play just about anyone at 1B, irrespective of experience. Baker (30.1 inning ML, 3 G MiL experience prior to 2011), Colvin (no prior experience) and LeMahieu (no prior experience) have already combined to field 92.0 innings at 1B. I don't think the prospect of lacking a legitimate option at the position will dissuade them from dealing Pena. Long term, I agree that they need to address 1B. Short term, it appears Quade will plug in anyone with a glove.

 

No, I mean "remotely close" in terms of actually being any good (outside of Baker against lefties). That's why I can see the Cubs not moving him if the return isn't that good since as bad as the team is I think they're terrified of projecting the image that they've completely given up.

[davell]

There's absolutely no reason to try and lock in Pena right now. If both Pujols and Fielder miraculously sign longterm deals between now and the deadline, maybe we think twice about dealing away Carlos.......With the money coming off the books, there is no chance we at least don't make it appear we're after one of the big prizes. Even if we miss out, it makes management look better for having given it a try. It'll be a public relations nightmare for a new ownership group that's already been hamstrung enough, if they make it public that they're not going after one of the big guys, after the couple of seasons we've endured.

 

 

I agree with Tim basically: Any money saved here, that goes towards draft picks and/or IFA is perfectly well spent in my eyes......

[PrimeTime]

CHICAGO -- The Chicago Cubs will bring in their top scouts on Monday and Tuesday to have meetings about the direction of the team with the trading deadline just five weeks away, according to a baseball source.

 

General manager Jim Hendry and assistant GM Randy Bush will preside over the two days of meetings. Hendry's objective will be to give the scouts direction as the team looks to acquire new players or move some off the present 25-man roster.

 

Hendry will talk to his top scouts about which teams the Cubs might match up with best as far as trades. The Cubs have a number of players with big contracts that not all teams could or would absorb.

 

The game plan will include going after top prospects and young players from other teams. Three Cubs players -- Alfonso Soriano, Carlos Zambrano and Aramis Ramirez -- with no-trade clauses or 5-and-10 no-trade rights have responded to media inquiries about whether they would accept trades.

 

Zambrano told FoxSports.com recently that while he wants to stay with the Cubs, he would accept a trade if the Cubs wanted to deal him.

 

"If they come to me and want to trade me, obviously it's because they don't want me here anymore," Zambrano told the website. "I always say that. I'll be here until the Cubs decide to trade me."

 

On June 6, Ramirez told ESPNChicago.com that he would not accept a trade.

 

Soriano told ESPNChicago.com on June 16 that if the team wanted to trade him, he would not stand in its way.

 

"It's not the worst thing," Soriano said of being traded. "When I got traded from the Yankees [for Alex Rodriguez] to Texas, that was a difficult one. But when I got traded to Washington, that's just part of the game. We work for the team. They do what they want to.

 

"I expect to stay here. This is my fifth year, but if they say they want to trade me, then why wouldn't I want to go somewhere else. I wouldn't stay here."

 

Outfielder Kosuke Fukudome has a limited no-trade clause and can veto a deal to a handful of teams.

 

The question most baseball people will ask the Cubs is: How much of each contract is the team willing to absorb? Chairman Tom Ricketts will have to be involved in some of these decisions.

 

Zambrano has $27 million left on his deal, which runs through 2012. Ramirez has $7.5 million left this season, as well as a $2 million buyout and a $1 million bonus he receives if he's traded.

 

Soriano has about $65 million remaining on his contract, which runs through 2014. Fukudome is in the last year of his contract and has a shade over $7 million left.

[Men in Blue]

Levine also said that no one should be considered "untouchable", even Castro. He cited Hanley Ramirez when he was with Boston. He said the Red Sox knew Ramirez was going to be a star but they got JB and it turned out that he helped them win championships. If that is the case, what would arms like Marmol and Marshall get us? At this point, I would have to think they need to listen to any and all offers.

 

Levine even mentioned the possibility of trading guys even if the Cubs had to eat a lot of the contract. I could only gather he was talking about Z and Soriano. I would also expect Fuk to get a decent amount of interest.

[Dallas Green]

Levine is Hendry's mouthpiece

 

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/cubs-insider/2011/06/cubs-to-hold-meetings-on-clubs-future.html