nilodnayr

They certainly have the depth to deal one of their OF prospects (Heyward, Schafer, Jones, Hernandez) and not blink an eye, but outside of the SP crop that just graduated and Hanson, it doesn't seem to me like they have anything that could fit the "two major league ready SP" requirement.

Ah, apparently there is such a thing as "too much pitching". No, but there is such a thing as "finite resources". It's not even a resources thing. They've got plenty of money, their owner just doesn't like to spend a lot of it. They aren't Cubs, Bosox, or Yankees loaded, but they certainly aren't hurting for cash even with funding the new stadium. Peavy is going to cost more than just money.

It would be literally impossible for the cubs to "get cheap with us".

Ah, apparently there is such a thing as "too much pitching". No, but there is such a thing as "finite resources".

A version of Theriot thats can't even play shortstop? Where do I sign!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Trading Lee? Not bringing Wood back? Trading Marquis? Trading Lee lops off 13M from 2008 Not brining back Wood lops of 7.5M from 2008 Trading Marquis lops off 6.375 from 2008 Grand total of about $27M saved over 2008 budget from the guys you mentioned We'll also lose Howrys 4M, Liebers 3.5M and Wards 1.2M, for roughly $36M total Now lets look at the increase in salaries from 2008 to 2009 Z=2.75M ARAM=1.65M Sori=3M Lilly=5M Fukudome=5.5M Dempster=lets assume 7M (increase from 5.5M to 12.5M) DeRo=.75M Harden=5M Gaudin, Johnson, Wuertz, Cotts, and Cedeno go to arbi, lets estimate $3M more total. So thats roughly $34M in increases meaning net net, we can drop our firstbaseman (without any reasonable subsitute), our closer (without adding another back of the BP guy), and our 5th starter (with a more than viable replacement) and save a whopping $2M from the 2008 payroll to go out there and throw at Tex! Now the above doesn't include signing bonuses. I don't think anyone is really sure how MLB teams account for them. Additionally, Crane did say that the payroll could be bumped. But all in all, the point of the exercise is to show that the Cubs are gonig to need a payroll bump to bring back the same team and even will need a bump if they get rid of Marquis and don't sign Wood. Where this money is coming from to throw at Tex, I still have no clue. Harden is only a 2.5 mil increase, from 4.5 to 7. I had a bit of a simpler exercise in mind. Would you agree that money wouldn't be a problem in the team bringing back Wood and Dempster(within reason of course)? I hope so, because that's the assumption I'm running with. To simplify, let's say Dempster would sign 4/50 and Wood 3/30. Trading Lee and not bringing Wood back is 23 million. Teixeira for ~20 mil and Cruz for ~5 is right there and it fits easily with any type of backloading on Teixeira's deal. If Lee brought you back a good SP, then you don't have to bring back Dempster, or you can drop Marquis' expiring contract on whoever wants his innings, that frees up an additional 6-12 million. We didn't have Harden for the entire year so we didn't pay his entire salary. Hence, for the Cubs, Harden's salary will increase ~$5M. As for your assumption. I think based on what we are hearing on Wood, its not a safe one. I also think they are banking on trading away most of Marquis' money. In total, we can bring back the same team (minus Howry, Lieber, Ward) with Demp at 4/50 and Wood at 3/30, we are looking at a $150M payroll. Thats over a $30M bump from this year. Last year we also got a $20M spike. To put that in perspective, in the 6 years from 2001-2006, our payroll increased $30M. Getting rid of Marquis and not re-signing Wood puts us back down to $130, which seems pretty reasonable to me. $10M is a bump, $30M is an out and out bonanza. Your scenario only works if that decent pitcher that we get back makes no money and is good enough to allow us to have faith in our pitching depth to get rid of 2/5ths of our rotation (ie Matt Cain). And frankly, I don't think Lee for Cain is all that likely.

Isn't Peavy under contract for awhile though? If so, the Braves would be acquiring him not only for 2008 but with an eye towards 2009-2011. As for 2008, if Smoltz is back, a front three of Peavy, Smoltz, and Jurrjens is nothing to sneeze at. Their offense isn't that bad with McCann, Chipper, Johnson, and Escobar. While Kotchman isn't great, he could conceivably contribute an OPS+ of 115-120 if given the opportunity. They do appear to be weak in the outfield, and if they have to deal away one of the five players I mentioned to get Peavy, that could put them in a bit of a bind offensively. But again, Peavy wouldn't just be acquired for next season only. They aren't in such bad shape that they can't make this team much better by 2009 or 2010. 2008 is over. Smoltz won't be back, at least not as a starter. If he makes it back it will be in the pen. Not to mention that Chipper most likely won't be back either. Really? Where are you getting that? Well the latest that I've seen has his option vesting, and him wanting to finish his career as a brave, but only if they are going to be a winning team. Hes got a short list of teams he'd accept a trade to. Hes talking about being traded a lot. http://www.ajc.com/blogs/content/shared-blogs/ajc/braves/entries/2008/09/28/ruminating_on_t.html?cxntfid=blogs_braves Hes actively campaigning for the team to win now by acquiring Peavy or Burnett. If they don't get either, it seems he'll be resigned to be the old dude on a rebuilding team. Not something he wants But on the flip side theres that GQ article from a month ago...

Now that could be interesting. Now I kind of want Derrek Lee to go. Where is this money coming from? Trading Lee? Not bringing Wood back? Trading Marquis? Trading Lee lops off 13M from 2008 Not brining back Wood lops of 7.5M from 2008 Trading Marquis lops off 6.375 from 2008 Grand total of about $27M saved over 2008 budget from the guys you mentioned We'll also lose Howrys 4M, Liebers 3.5M and Wards 1.2M, for roughly $36M total Now lets look at the increase in salaries from 2008 to 2009 Z=2.75M ARAM=1.65M Sori=3M Lilly=5M Fukudome=5.5M Dempster=lets assume 7M (increase from 5.5M to 12.5M) DeRo=.75M Harden=5M Gaudin, Johnson, Wuertz, Cotts, and Cedeno go to arbi, lets estimate $3M more total. So thats roughly $34M in increases meaning net net, we can drop our firstbaseman (without any reasonable subsitute), our closer (without adding another back of the BP guy), and our 5th starter (with a more than viable replacement) and save a whopping $2M from the 2008 payroll to go out there and throw at Tex! Now the above doesn't include signing bonuses. I don't think anyone is really sure how MLB teams account for them. Additionally, Crane did say that the payroll could be bumped. But all in all, the point of the exercise is to show that the Cubs are gonig to need a payroll bump to bring back the same team and even will need a bump if they get rid of Marquis and don't sign Wood. Where this money is coming from to throw at Tex, I still have no clue.

The pen will be fine? You're taking Marmol out of the most valuable role for the team and you're losing Wood. Who'd be the primary set up man? The highly inconsistent Samardzija? Bring back Bob Howry? I wish they were more worried when they were giving Soriano 8 year contracts. My thoughts are that we need a guy. Without Wood, we still need a guy to be at the back end of our bullpen. Regardless of whether you are deploying Marmol as the closer or using him in higher leverage situations that aren't the nineth, the bullpen, without Wood is down one good arm. Now, I think the issue is that the Cubs are concerned as to whether or not Wood is that guy. This is most certainly a defensible position. Wood is a guy a year ago that nearly quit because his shoulder was so screwed up. Then one day, miraculously, it was better. With no rhyme or reason his shoulder didn't hurt anymore. You have to take the position that anything you got from Wood this year was gravy. Hes pitching on borrowed time. Just as easily as his shoulder miraculously one day went from terrible to functional, the opposite can happen. We are fortunate that it didn't happen this year and of course, the more time Wood puts the bum shoulder behind him, the more we can put creedence into the idea that he's healed, but the fact remains that he is one very normal bullpen pitch away from being done and those chances are one thousand fold more for Wood than the average pitcher. Conversely, it all depends on years and money. If Wood is willing to take a discount (which I contended he DID NOT do last offseason), then maybe that risk will be worth it. Additionally, you need to look at who his possible replacements could be and how much they would cost to see if the risk is worth it. Those will ultimately be the questions the cubs will have to ask themselves.

Now that could be interesting. Now I kind of want Derrek Lee to go. Where is this money coming from?

Isn't Peavy under contract for awhile though? If so, the Braves would be acquiring him not only for 2008 but with an eye towards 2009-2011. As for 2008, if Smoltz is back, a front three of Peavy, Smoltz, and Jurrjens is nothing to sneeze at. Their offense isn't that bad with McCann, Chipper, Johnson, and Escobar. While Kotchman isn't great, he could conceivably contribute an OPS+ of 115-120 if given the opportunity. They do appear to be weak in the outfield, and if they have to deal away one of the five players I mentioned to get Peavy, that could put them in a bit of a bind offensively. But again, Peavy wouldn't just be acquired for next season only. They aren't in such bad shape that they can't make this team much better by 2009 or 2010. 2008 is over. Smoltz won't be back, at least not as a starter. If he makes it back it will be in the pen. Not to mention that Chipper most likely won't be back either.

Haren was traded after a breakout season. Peavy has been outstanding for several years now and is a perennial Cy Young candidate, not to mention he won it in '07. What the A's got for Haren isn't a good comparison to what the Padres should expect for Peavy. If you look at Haren and Peavy's PECOTAs before this year, Haren's MORP for 2008-2010 totals to a little over $45M. If you look at Peavy's MORP 2009-2013 is roughly $82M. Now PECOTA is just one projection system and MORP is far from perfect, but I'm just using it as an example of how the two players were projected BEFORE this season. So, as of the trade Haren was projected to be worth $45M and had a $16M contract over the next three years. Peavy (as of last years PECOTAs is projected to be worth $82M and has a $78M contract over the next 5 years. Doesn't matter. If healthy, Peavy is a guaranteed ace. The big market, playoff caliber teams are going to go that extra mile for the definitive #1. Haren, while very good, and a better deal for the $, simply isn't that guy. The market for those guys is different. If the haul is similar, it will be because of health concerns after this past year that Peavy just had. Um, yes, yes it does matter. You can't just say "guaranteed ace" and throw out everything else. You don't think that teams value players not just on their ability but also on how much they are paid and for how long? If that was the case then guys like Johan Santana wouldn't be traded for the modest package the Twins received. I'm sorry, but if you give me the choice between guaranteed ace making ace money or probably ace making mid-level starting second baseman money, unless I'm the Yankees, I'm going to take the latter. And with starting pitchers, the health issue is always going to be there. As the MORP vs Salary comparison shows, Haren was the more valuable asset. If the haul is similar, it will be because teams inefficiently use money and resources.

Haren was traded after a breakout season. Peavy has been outstanding for several years now and is a perennial Cy Young candidate, not to mention he won it in '07. What the A's got for Haren isn't a good comparison to what the Padres should expect for Peavy. If you look at Haren and Peavy's PECOTAs before this year, Haren's MORP for 2008-2010 totals to a little over $45M. If you look at Peavy's MORP 2009-2013 is roughly $82M. Now PECOTA is just one projection system and MORP is far from perfect, but I'm just using it as an example of how the two players were projected BEFORE this season. So, as of the trade Haren was projected to be worth $45M and had a $16M contract over the next three years. Peavy (as of last years PECOTAs is projected to be worth $82M and has a $78M contract over the next 5 years.

Haren was traded after a breakout season. Peavy has been outstanding for several years now and is a perennial Cy Young candidate, not to mention he won it in '07. What the A's got for Haren isn't a good comparison to what the Padres should expect for Peavy. The Danny Haren trade actually is a great comp. While Haren is a tick below Peavy in talent and was under team control for 3 years instead of 5, you have to look at the production vs cost of those years they are under control. As of the Haren trade, he was under contract from 2008 at 4M, 2009 at 5.5M and 2010 at a 6.75M club option. Making for a total of 3 years of Haren at 16.25M. Peavy's deal is 5/78M (assuming option is picked up). Peavy's deal is very team friendly in year 1, but escalates significantly in 2010. Its still below market value, but by somewhere around 3-5M a year, whereas Haren is being compensated under market value by roughly 10M/year. If you add up all the years, Haren over 3 years and Peavy over 5 years, (even though Peavy is more years) are worth about the same under market value in total. Throw in that Haren (while not being the caliber of Peavy) was going to be paid roughly 5M as opposed to roughly 15M leaving more of a scarce resource ($) to be utilized elsewhere as well as the fact that with pitchers you always have a heightened injury risk so a 3 year contract is inherently less risky than a 5 year contract, and that skews to Haren being a better deal. I would also be remiss to not point out that the scarceness of positions (ie 25 man roster, 5 Starting Pitchers) means that Pitcher A being twince as good as Pitcher B means that pitcher A is worth quite a bit MORE THAN twice as much as Pitcher B, so that skews more to Peavy's side, but IMO, not enough to make Peavy an overall more attractive option. Now of course as Paul pointed out, each player has a different value to different teams and it takes two to tango which people take for granted. Additionally on the other side of the ledger, from the SD perspective I would have to imagine that a Haren-like package would be what they would be looking for, as opposed to say a Sabathia-like package of one super stud prospect). Jake Peavy in and of himself is not going to make the Padres a playoff contender. Similarly, that extra 15M and a Matt LaPorta-like player aren't going to propel the Padres into playoff contention. The Padres should be looking for a very highly regarded top prospect (like Carlos Gonzalez) surrounded by a package of very interesting prospects (like the rest of that package). One guy isn't a difference maker for the Padres, they have a lot of holes and need a lot of cheap, high potential production in order to be able to compete in the next few years. Oakland has laid down the blue print that SD should be following.

I wouldn't give up on Fukudome just yet. I am a bit worried though becuase Fuk is clearly in Lou's doghouse, and I can't remember a player who has made his way out of there yet. Fontenot? Maybe that was just SS Fontenot that was in Lou's doghouse though. But we have never seen anyone get as entrenched in Lous doghouse as Kosuke.

Can we please stop saying that our 2007 regular season was good? Considering how bad the first 6-8 weeks of 2007 were, I think the 2007 was pretty good. Do those weeks not count? I'm not sure the original poster said the 2007 regular season was good, but I don't see why you can't call it that. If somebody said really good or great, that would be pushing it, but how isn't 85-77, with a pythag record of 87-75, and an NL ranking of 8 in runs scored and 2 in ERA not good? It was the 6th best record in the NL, which generally qualifies you for the playoffs in any US sport aside from baseball, and they did win their division. Clearly they were nothing special but it was a pretty good team. I think you have a good point there. The Cubs should play hockey instead of baseball.

Does Hatteberg still want to play?

Soto will definitely provide a greater MORP minus salary spread than Peavy will over the next 5 years.

One of the top 10 or so relievers in the game who's still cost controlled and three likely top 100 prospects. I don't think I'm overrating anyone. If you want to get technical. A Peavy trade is closer to the Bedard trade where at the time the O's got a decent reliever in Sherrill, a good pitching prospect in Tillman who stunk in high A with the O's, a toolsy OF in Jones who has had some service time, a tall reliever and a potential back of the rotation starter. Peavy's value isn't what it was last year when he was Cy young winner. He missed some starts this year and K/9 down and K/BB his went up. No whether this is blip on the radar remains to be seen. Yes, Marmol is a top 10 reliever. RELIEVER. Hes good, don't get me wrong, but hes also an injury risk, walks WAY too many guys, and whos value is mitigated being on a crappy team like the Padres. Samardzija signed with us because of the NTC, 0% chance he gets traded. General consensus over in the minor league forum is that Vitters will be 25-40 and Samardzija will be 50-75. Rotoworld had Vitters at 44 mid-season. Pie can't qualify for lists anymore. Theres a big difference between a top 100 prospect thats ranked in the top 20 and one thats not.

Soto will definitely provide a greater MORP minus salary spread than Peavy will over the next 5 years.

Wait when did Peavy become Johan Santana on a Brawndo/HGH cocktail Good lord, If that's not going to get it done. No one else will be get him either. Short of the Red Sox. But that's besides the point anyways. Shark is not being traded this offseason. You do realize though that the Santana trade was basically a posting fee, the team who won then had to pay him market value. Thats most definitely not the case here. I also think you value all of those Cubs players too much.

Just go get Logan White. Why the Mariners haven't made a play at him is confounding. I think Randy Bush would make a horrible GM and I am not a fan of Oneri Fleita. Yeah, thats my reaction as well, Randy Bush is nowhere close to a worthwhile GM. Hendry has "succeeded" not because of his underlings but possibly in spite of his underlings.

Actually its a 9% increase, right Meph? Shouldn't dividing percentages be PARAMOUNT? And that 2% doesn't pass the smell test to me. Looking at the 147 qualifiers in 2008, I got a standard deviation of 6.4%. Expanding the sample out to anyone with 150 PAs (387 in the sample), I got a standard deviation of 6.9%. Where do you get 2% from?

Actually its a 9% increase, right Meph? Shouldn't dividing percentages be PARAMOUNT?

Still no game 5 refund for me