Will Javier Vazquez Demand a Trade??

[HoopsCubs]

He's got 2 years and a steep $24 million left on his deal. I don't know how the D-Backs feel about him, but I'm sure they would welcome the $24M relief, if it came to that. Rules regarding players traded in the midst of multi-year deals allow him to seek a trade. If he demands it, the D-Backs have until March to comply, or he becomes a free agent, which could be rather risky for Javier unless he feels confident he could find equivalent money from another club.

 

Look at this from the Cubs perspective. The Cubs have telegraphed through the beat writers that they are going to actively search for a starting pitcher in the offseason. The implication is that they want a solid innings eater to offset the risk of injury to a current pitcher. If it meant getting Chad Tracy, Connor Jackson or Carlos Quentin as part of the deal, would you take on Vazquez and his $24M?

[CuseCubFan69]

What do the Cubs lose player wise in a trade like this? I'd do it because the Cubs would be getting a quality young bat too.

[HoopsCubs]

What do the Cubs lose player wise in a trade like this? I'd do it because the Cubs would be getting a quality young bat too.

 

Oh, I think we'd have to give up something good, whether it's 1 or 2 or 3 players/prospects. My questions for the group here are (1) is getting Vazquez plus a young bat a good idea in the first place and (2) what would be a fair trade for both teams?

[CuseCubFan69]

What do the Cubs lose player wise in a trade like this? I'd do it because the Cubs would be getting a quality young bat too.

 

Oh, I think we'd have to give up something good, whether it's 1 or 2 or 3 players/prospects. My questions for the group here are (1) is getting Vazquez plus a young bat a good idea in the first place and (2) what would be a fair trade for both teams?

 

So trading a Harvey/Hill type of thing? I think it really depends on who the Cubs give up. Money wise I don't see it as a problem since the OF's are very cheap salary wise.

 

If you have a Vazquez as a 4 or 5 pitcher I don't see that as a bad thing either. Z, Prior, Wood, Vazquez and Maddux isn't a bad rotation at all plus it give the Cubs some "veteran" security starter wise.

[goonys evil twin]

What do the Cubs lose player wise in a trade like this? I'd do it because the Cubs would be getting a quality young bat too.

 

Oh, I think we'd have to give up something good, whether it's 1 or 2 or 3 players/prospects. My questions for the group here are (1) is getting Vazquez plus a young bat a good idea in the first place and (2) what would be a fair trade for both teams?

 

I'd entertain the idea, but they'd have to get back a serious bat in order to justify the move. Vasquez has pretty much defined mediocrity over his career, and is paid far too much for what he gives you. 200 average innings is not worth anywhere close to $12m.

[TheDude]

Vasquez has solid indicators. A nearly 4:1 K/BB ratio and a respectable WHIP.

 

If I were in the Cubs front office, I would entertain trading for him. However, I would not be pushed into the position of giving up much talent, and approach the trade as a salary relief deal, as opposed to a talent-for-talent deal. Even with a good young player coming back.

 

So to answer Hoops's questions:

1 - Yes it is good idea

2 - I look to give up excess youth starting pitching and try to move Patterson.

[USSoccer]

Vasquez has solid indicators. A nearly 4:1 K/BB ratio and a respectable WHIP.

 

If I were in the Cubs front office, I would entertain trading for him. However, I would not be pushed into the position of giving up much talent, and approach the trade as a salary relief deal, as opposed to a talent-for-talent deal. Even with a good young player coming back.

 

So to answer Hoops's questions:

1 - Yes it is good idea

2 - I look to give up excess youth starting pitching and try to move Patterson.

 

Patterson's value couldn't be lower unless he had one of his legs fall off. I don't see him as an attractive trading chip.

 

And for $12m per, I'd rather sign Kevin Millwood via FA and hang onto whatever prospects we'd have to give up.

[mul21]

Vasquez has solid indicators. A nearly 4:1 K/BB ratio and a respectable WHIP.

 

If I were in the Cubs front office, I would entertain trading for him. However, I would not be pushed into the position of giving up much talent, and approach the trade as a salary relief deal, as opposed to a talent-for-talent deal. Even with a good young player coming back.

 

So to answer Hoops's questions:

1 - Yes it is good idea

2 - I look to give up excess youth starting pitching and try to move Patterson.

 

Patterson's value couldn't be lower unless he had one of his legs fall off. I don't see him as an attractive trading chip.

 

And for $12m per, I'd rather sign Kevin Millwood via FA and hang onto whatever prospects we'd have to give up.

 

I have to agree with this. Millwods numbers were better in the hitter friendly AL than Vazquez's were in the NL, he will probably come cheaper than $12M, and you don't give up any prospects. Granted there won't be a prospect coming back to you, but the additional cash available allows improvement in other areas.

[NorthsideAvenger]

He's got 2 years and a steep $24 million left on his deal. I don't know how the D-Backs feel about him, but I'm sure they would welcome the $24M relief, if it came to that. Rules regarding players traded in the midst of multi-year deals allow him to seek a trade. If he demands it, the D-Backs have until March to comply, or he becomes a free agent, which could be rather risky for Javier unless he feels confident he could find equivalent money from another club.

 

Look at this from the Cubs perspective. The Cubs have telegraphed through the beat writers that they are going to actively search for a starting pitcher in the offseason. The implication is that they want a solid innings eater to offset the risk of injury to a current pitcher. If it meant getting Chad Tracy, Connor Jackson or Carlos Quentin as part of the deal, would you take on Vazquez and his $24M?

 

I would offer up Sergio Mitre (I think he's a goner, with Williams in the org, now) and a couple of decent arms (say Welly or Leicester) for Vasquez and Tracy.

[TheDude]

Millwods numbers were better in the hitter friendly AL than Vazquez's were in the NL, he will probably come cheaper than $12M, and you don't give up any prospects. Granted there won't be a prospect coming back to you, but the additional cash available allows improvement in other areas.

Why would Millwood come cheaper?

 

He is 30 years old and coming off an ERA title. His agent is Bore-ass. Millwood is going to command at least 10 million a year, likely for 4 years.

 

[edit - added key words 'at least']

[USSoccer]

Millwods numbers were better in the hitter friendly AL than Vazquez's were in the NL, he will probably come cheaper than $12M, and you don't give up any prospects. Granted there won't be a prospect coming back to you, but the additional cash available allows improvement in other areas.

Why would Millwood come cheaper?

 

He is 30 years old and coming off an ERA title. His agent is Bore-ass. Millwood is going to command at 10 million a year, likely for 4 years.

 

Well, $10m is cheaper than $12m, and we wouldn't have to give up prospects for him. Plus, Milwood is light years better than Vasquez.

[Wheelimus]

Difference is, if you take the $12 mil off their hands, they're going to have to give you something else of value just to get the money gone. For better or worse, Mitre/Wellemeyer/Leicester don't seem to have much of a future in this organization. If you could dump a few of them off and get back Vazquez and a near MLB ready position player at a position we could use somebody at, why not?

[TheDude]

Millwods numbers were better in the hitter friendly AL than Vazquez's were in the NL, he will probably come cheaper than $12M, and you don't give up any prospects. Granted there won't be a prospect coming back to you, but the additional cash available allows improvement in other areas.

Why would Millwood come cheaper?

 

He is 30 years old and coming off an ERA title. His agent is Bore-ass. Millwood is going to command at 10 million a year, likely for 4 years.

 

Well, $10m is cheaper than $12m, and we wouldn't have to give up prospects for him. Plus, Milwood is light years better than Vasquez.

That is why as soon as hit submit, I knew I had to edit the post and add, 'at least'.

 

Market will dictate what Millwood is worth, and it may well be 12 or more.

 

But, as others have pointed out, for the same amount of money, you might be able to bring back a young player with a bright future. So part of Vasquez's salary is really in buying that stud.

[burnt out cubbie fan]

I would do that in a heartbeat but I wouldn't give up Pie as part of the deal. Also, I would only do the deal if we got Jackson or Quentin.

[Backtobanks]

Vasquez has solid indicators. A nearly 4:1 K/BB ratio and a respectable WHIP.

 

If I were in the Cubs front office, I would entertain trading for him. However, I would not be pushed into the position of giving up much talent, and approach the trade as a salary relief deal, as opposed to a talent-for-talent deal. Even with a good young player coming back.

 

So to answer Hoops's questions:

1 - Yes it is good idea

2 - I look to give up excess youth starting pitching and try to move Patterson.

 

Patterson's value couldn't be lower unless he had one of his legs fall off. I don't see him as an attractive trading chip.

And for $12m per, I'd rather sign Kevin Millwood via FA and hang onto whatever prospects we'd have to give up.

 

I agree that Patterson alone (or as the front person in a trade) is not much of a trading chip, but I would bet that Hendry is going to hear Patterson's name quite often as the throw-in in trade talk. I think there are a lot of teams out there that think they could "heal" Patterson or are willing to take a shot at him as the throw-in in some deal. He could be one of those players that needs a change of address.

[USSoccer]

Vasquez has solid indicators. A nearly 4:1 K/BB ratio and a respectable WHIP.

 

If I were in the Cubs front office, I would entertain trading for him. However, I would not be pushed into the position of giving up much talent, and approach the trade as a salary relief deal, as opposed to a talent-for-talent deal. Even with a good young player coming back.

 

So to answer Hoops's questions:

1 - Yes it is good idea

2 - I look to give up excess youth starting pitching and try to move Patterson.

 

Patterson's value couldn't be lower unless he had one of his legs fall off. I don't see him as an attractive trading chip.

And for $12m per, I'd rather sign Kevin Millwood via FA and hang onto whatever prospects we'd have to give up.

 

I agree that Patterson alone (or as the front person in a trade) is not much of a trading chip, but I would bet that Hendry is going to hear Patterson's name quite often as the throw-in in trade talk. I think there are a lot of teams out there that think they could "heal" Patterson or are willing to take a shot at him as the throw-in in some deal. He could be one of those players that needs a change of address.

 

I can see that. What I'd bet happens is that Hendry sells Patterson for cents on the dollar at the winter meetings for a bullpen arm.

[nilodnayr]

By the way, the yanks are picking up 3M per of Javys contract so whoever would pick him up would only be on the hook for 8.5 and 9.5. Not bad at all.