HoopsCubs

Are you thinking 2 years and $12M with a mutual (includes vesting) option for the 3rd year?

I suppose every contending team is looking for a decent reliever this time of year, but San Diego has been pretty good in that department (top 10 reliever ERA), so I wonder about two things: (1) Could Hendry have done better with a more "desperate" team looking for relief (i.e. the White Sox)? (2) Is San Diego accumulating relievers to make a trade for 3B?

I think Maddux has 2 goals left in his baseball life: quality of life (i.e. he's on record saying Chicago is his favorite city other than his home in Vegas) and he wants to see the Cubs win a World Series. Obvioulsy, the latter isn't happening in 2006, but with the Cubs financial reach, it could still happen in 2007. That's why I think he (with Boras) and Hendry will reach a 1 year deal.

It would not suprise me one bit, if Hendry held on to Maddux and tried to sign him to a one year $8-10M deal at the end of the season. I think it will be 1 year and $6M (which was his 2004 salary). I'll stick to what I said in the offseason - right or wrong, Maddux will be a Cub in 2007. I'm pretty sure Hendry will bring him back to be his #4.

Just heard on sporting news radio that Milwaukee might be the favorite to land hillenbrand.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2525138 for minor league catcher Max Ramirez.

In the past, I think Maddux has stated his preference for NL teams. I don't see how the Cubs would get cash relief in this deal. Jones + Aramis is about $16M per season, which equals the $16M New York is on the hook for ARod (recall Texas agreed to pick up significant dollars in the ARod trade).

I saw this in today's Daily Herald from Barry Rozner, and it got me thinking: "Dodger doings Not only is Dodger Stadium the best ballpark for Maddux, it might be the right destination for several other Cubs. The Dodgers are the perfect trading partner because they need Maddux, third baseman Aramis Ramirez and any of the veteran arms at the end of the bullpen. They’re also loaded with young players, and if the Cubs want to improve quickly, that’s one place they’ll look." http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/rozner.asp?id=209327 So anyway, it's been a week or so since we talked about this on another thread. But we're probably good for another discussion as we're 11 days away from the non-waiver trading deadline. How do you view this situation? How should we view this situation? Here are the facts as I understand them. Ramirez is due $11.0M in 2007 and $11.5M in 2008. There is a mutual option of $11.0M for 2009, which is guaranteed with 270 games played in 2007 and 2008. But, Aramis does have the right to void his contract after this season and become a free agent. Will Aramis opt out to find a better deal? It seems both LA teams have shown interest and both will have money to offer a 3 or 4 year deal. Does Aramis want to leave? I sense he likes it here save the press getting on him when he doesn't run the bases. Is Aramis less likely to opt out if Hendry guarantees the $11.0M in 2009? Perhaps, but is that the right or wrong thing for Hendry to do when looking at the big picture? Is it best for Hendry to trade him now with the specter of opting out hanging over his head? He should get a very decent package of players/prospects back plus a another $10M freed up in the offseason, but then who fills the void at 3B - Michael Barrett? The free agent list for 3B seems very sparse. Has Hendry even discussed the opt-out possibility with Aramis' agents? Where do you all stand on this topic? (a) Trade him (b) Keep him by extending him © He'll stay regardless of 2009 option issue or extension. (d) If he walks, so be it. Hoops

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2524247 http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/articles/2006/07/20/beckett_signs_deal_to_remain_through_2009/ 3 years and $30M. - $2.0M signing bonus - $6.0M in 2007 - $9.5M in 2008 - $10.5M in 2009 - $12.0M team option or $2M buyout in 2010 - Option vests with 28 games started in 2009 or 56 in 2008 and 2009

I think I heard this on ESPN radio this morning: 22 teams are within 7.5 games of either division leader or wild card leader. They used 7.5 as a break point because that is the most number of games a team has been out at the All star break during the wild card era, and still made post-season - I think it happened twice since 1995. At any rate, the ESPN conclusion is that it should be a seller's market for the 8 other teams, of which the Cubs are one.

The observation I am making is that this almost seems like a financially driven move cloaked as a "we need better relief pitching" move by the Reds. Kearns and Lopez will both be 2nd time arbitration eligible and are in line to get substantial raises. The players the Reds got back are still "under control" to some extent. Maybe the Reds figured they'd get more now than trying in the offseason, but I agree with all of you that they should have received more talent for what they gave up.

It makes perfect sense. Gives Philly a young 3B and C with potential and at a very cheap price to go along with a nice young nucleus. They are both ML ready and Philly could field and entire offensive team with Jimmy Rollins as the "old man". Angels probably wouldn't mind losing McPherson and Mathis because they have Figgins and Napoli who are young and good in their places. Raw, You have all the makings and trade know-how to be a source!

I have a good source in Anaheim, who is telling me that with their recent surge in a weak division, GM Bill Stoneman is "feverishly" looking for a bat, and has focused in on Bobby Abreu as a leading candidate. The source thinks Stoneman can offer a better package of prospects to the Phillies compared to what the Red Sox or Yankees can offer, and are in as a good a financial position as Boston and New York to take on most of Abreu's salary because they'll save $12M with Darin Erstad and Adam Kennedy coming off the books. Stoneman has made it clear that Kendrick, Wood and Weaver are off limits. Supposedly the package Stoneman could offer Gillick is 3B Dallas McPherson and C Jeff Mathis, who would replace free-agents-to-be David Bell and Mike Lieberthal in 2007, and the Angels would take on most of Abreu's contract. Stoneman would probably put Abreu in CF between Rivera and Guerrero (Garret Anderson DHing) and move Chone Figgins to full time 3B for the rest of the year. Just a rumor, but there is some definite plausibility. If Gillick wants a pitching prospect out of the deal, he would probably have to contribute to picking up more of Abreu's remaining ~$18M.

Since Adam Everett has a 605 OPS, and Houston's relief pitching ERA is ranked 10th in the NL, why not trade them Scott Williamson and Neifi Perez (hitting very well in July) for a prospect? Houston selects any prospect to trade if they pick up Neifi's salary in 2007; the Astros select one prospect from a group of 10 specified by Cubs scouts, if the Cubs pick up Neifi's 2007 salary.

You're probably right, but something tells me the guy who is going to get his playing time reduced with these deals is Morgan Ensberg. Was it Vance or someone else, who recently had a link showing that Tim Purpura dislikes Morgan Ensberg as much as Pat Gillick dislikes Pat Burrell? I don't remember where I saw that exactly, but I recall reading that Purpura and Ensberg were on the outs.

By the way, does this trade for Huff and sending down Lane mean that: (1) Huff plays 3B, Berkman plays RF, Lamb plays 1B and Morgan Ensberg spends more time on the bench, or (2) Huff plays RF, Berkman plays 1B, Ensberg plays 3B and Mike Lamb spends more time on the bench?

Is Lugo next?

... according to Bill Madden of the NY Daily News. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/story/434479p-366047c.html As Madden points out, it's hard to believe that anyone would take on Burrell's $13M in 2007 and $14M in 2008, which makes trading Abreu all the more likely scenario. He's owed big money too, of course, but it sounds like the Phillies think they'll get more in return for a guy who bats left-handed and is under contract for only 1 more season. Reading between the lines here and what Jayson stark wrot elast week, Pat Burrell is really unpopular with fans and management. It's clear that Pat Gillick wants to dump salary to address his woeful pitching. Of course, he does free up $26M by waving goodbye to free agents-to-be: David Bell, Randy Wolf, Mike Lieberthal and Arthur Rhodes, but then again that also means he needs to fill those spots in the offseason. I have always liked Pat Gillick and think he's quite accomplished, but this train wreck will be a real test. Hoops

I'm hoping it's former Northwestern Wildcat, Mr. Mark Loretta.

Do you think he's so close to the end that you don't offer him a 3 year extension? The Giants are certainly not going to be hurting for money this offseason considering Bonds, Alou, Durham and Finley are free agents (along with Schmidt).

That thought crossed my mind too, but I'm still having trouble seeing a team only 3.5 games back in their division and only 1.5 games back in the wild card trading their ace.

Wonder if they are then trading Garcia, Vazquez or Garland to the Phillies to get Rowand back.

You shouldn't. It's a pretty high probablilty assumption that Walker is not in Hendry's 2007 plans considering he wasn't really in the 2006 plans either. Cubs look like they will have 3 new faces in the starting line-up next year - a new LF, a new CF (although Pierre re-signing rumors are there) and either a new 2B or SS.

My sources tell me that despite his occasional on the field tirades, Hendry is absolutely thrilled with Zambrano. My observation is that Z has been more mature this year, especially the last 30 days. I think this negotiation is heading down a very similar path to Lee and Wood from January 2004. So, here's my prediction: the 2 sides will agree to a 1 year $9M deal in January to avoid arbitration, and Hendry will state that he hopes to work out a long term deal by Spring Training. In late February, we'll get the word that Zambrano has agreed to a 3 year $43M extension to the $9M 1 year deal: i.e. total of 4 years and $52M: 2007 - $9M 2008 - $12M 2009 - $14M 2010 - $16M 2011 - $16M team option or $1M buyout

Well, I asked these questions last week, and Paul Sullivan has answers today (link requires registration): http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/cs-060709zambrano,1,3490951.story?coll=cs-cubs-headlines Key takeaways: (1) Sullivan's opinion: "Zambrano becomes a free agent after '07 and stands to cash in big with a four- or five-year deal worth $13 million to $15 million per season." (2) Z's thinking: "I'd like to get that done before spring training or in spring training," Zambrano said Sunday. "If not, this is a business. I still have one more year with the Cubs. Hopefully it ends up in a good situation. I don't want to leave Chicago." Hoops