BigbadB

Exactly what does getting Peavy accomplish for them? They lose a guy in Escobar who has potential to be a all-star SS for the next decade, and any prospects that they give up they lose out on developing them to be part of a competing team 3-4 years down the road. There is no way they contend this year and it's unlikely they contend they next 2 seasons. They'll end up giving up a lot, plus the pads will likely expect whoever gets him to pick up at least part of the contract, and thats not something that rebuiling teams should be doing. People keep saying the Braves are rebuilding and I don't know where that is coming from. Sure they are a pretty young team, but they have aging guys like Chipper, Smoltz, and Hudson (the latter will be back by midseason). The Braves had the 4th highest payroll in the NL last year, over 100Mil. They have plenty of money to spend this offseason. The Braves' payroll has been over 85M every year since 2001. The only big salaries they have are Hudson (13M) and Chipper's 10M option. They have enough to add Peavy and a bat. That would put them back in NL East contention right away. The reason I don't see the Braves being big players is that the Braves didn't build their dynasty in the 90's by trading their prospects for a star pitcher. They kept their prospects and built the team around those prospects. And then they made the team even better by getting guys like Maddux. To me, and I could be wrong, for the Braves to give up prospects like Heyward or Schafer or Jurgens for a guy who is already making big money, wastes the best years of Peavy's career while all of these guys are going through growing pains of learning how to become successful major league players. By the time they are really contributing, Peavy will be off to his next destination, after tiring of not winning in Atlanta. Couple that in with the fact that New York and Phily both have the talent and money to spend to strengthen their teams even more in the East, and I think Atlanta is jeopardizing their future just to finish 3rd this year and next. ETA: I think the Marlins would be in a better position to go after Peavy right now than the Braves. Hanley, Hermida, Uggla, Maybin, Josh Johnson, Volstad, Miller.

I wouldn't have a problem with Holliday going to St. Louis. It's a deep drive, back, back, back, Holliday is at the wall, and it's a home run. Mark Mulder serves up another crushing drive with his 75 MPH fastball. Juan Pierre fist pumps as he circles the bases and the Dodgers take an 11-0 lead.

The link does not say a deal is currently tentative. What gives?

I'm guessing FatherRyan is currently signing up for LA Dodgers season tickets.

So I'm talking to a bunch of my Padres fan buddies last night, and they asked what the climate looked like for Peavy to be traded to the Cubs. I said, "well, the Cubs have the players necessary to make a deal, and the Cubs seem like the best trade partner for the Padres right now with Peavy's limited number of teams he'd be willing to trade to, so I'll go ahead and say that it won't happen."

Is Bradley considered expensive?

You just gotta love comments like this. Towers is playing fantasy baseball and bringing teams like the Yankees and Angels into the discussion while Peavy is denying he will accept a trade to either team, yet some insider is convincing people that all you need to get Peavy is to hit a lousy double. Ask for a double, and all you're probably going to get is a double. But hey, the one thing the Roberts thread had that the Peavy thread didn't is some nice, juicy insider info. Only problem is I'm not sure our farm system can hit a single, let alone a double.

If they don't resign Dempster in this scenario, they'll still have Marquis. That's not saying much, but still.....

I love how Fred always capitalizes every letter in "CUBS." It took him a while to stop referring to them as "ORPHANS", the name he knew them by in his childhood. ;) I kid, Fred. I kid. Oh, that's good stuff. And I'm not kidding.

Brandon Webb's ground ball rate and low pitch counts make me drool. I think I'd probably go with Halladay next. But, neither of those guys are available and Peavy is, and he's #3 on my list. How mad would an opposing team (Milwaukee, St. Louis, Houston) be if they came into Chicago for a 3 game set and had to face Peavy, Harden and Zambrano?

They should have announced it last night and stole all of Obama's thunder.

I'm really sick of seeing this logic(and the usual accompiniment of IT'S BEEN 100 YEARS GO FOR IT ALL NOW) as if there is no limit to the amount of young players you should give up to try for it all in one season. Let's say we give up all of our best tradeable assets for Peavy. Then Soto goes down and we need a stopgap to catch the rest of the way. What are we gonna give up for that rental? James Adduci? Every player in a system has some sort of value attached to them. Every time one is given up there is an opportunity cost at stake as to what else that player could acquire now, what they could acquire later, what they could contribute now, and what they could contribute later. Throwing the kitchen sink at a team because we've got a chance at it all is a good way to guarantee that you have only a few chances to win it all. If Peavy was coming over with 1 year remaining on his contract, I'd probably agree with you. But, you'd have him for at least 4 years. I wouldn't call that selling out to win it all this year. As has been pointed out, if Dempster were to sign a deal elsewhere, the Cubs would be receiving 2 picks in next year's draft. Those two players could end up being better than any of the players we are talking about dealing for Peavy. This is hardly an absurd discussion. This also isn't the Cubs of yesteryear. With the payroll they are currently sporting, they could very easily stay competitive for the next umpteen years just by having advantages over small market teams in signing free agents. I wouldn't trade the farm for Jeremy Hermida. But I would trade the farm for someone as significant as Jake Peavy.

I'd rather have Peavy. We don't need another backloaded contract killing this club in the future, which a deal to Sabathia likely would be. Peavy would be cheaper, slightly younger, and arguably just as good as Sabathia would be. Plus I thought Piniella said we don't have the luxury of going balls to the wall crazy with free agents because of the ownership change in limbo and we have to fix ourselves through trades? I don't think Peavy is close to as good as Sabathia right now. I'd be worried about how Peavy would do without playing half his games in Petco. Plus he was very Kazmiresque this season with his high pitch counts causing him to leave the game early all the time. Meanwhile Sabathia is an innings eating mahcine. I agree with you that I'd probably rather have Peavy at the price each owuld cost, but I don't think there's any way you could say Peavy is as good as Sabathia right now. Who is to say Sabathia will still be as good? Sabathia pitches 9 innings, yeah. But at what cost? High pitch counts each time out? Future arm issues? Who knows. Maybe he is a freak of nature. But the fact remains that Peavy is still an ace on almost any staff, and he will cost $8 mil (or $9, don't remember) this year, while Sabathia will cost someone $20 million. I'll still take Peavy. That gap between ability and payroll savings is too much to ignore, IMO Peavy's primary cost is in players traded, and you're leaving that part out of your equation completely. Agreed. Not to mention the fact that teams like NYY and LAD along with nearly every other team in MLB will be interested in floating offers at Sabathia. How confident are you that the Cubs can outbid the Yankees for Sabathia? The current market for Peavy is 3 teams, and all you have to do to win that bid is offer the most talent. There is no one in the Cubs minor league system that I could honestly say I value more than Jake Peavy. I'm not sure if there is any combination of 3 or 4 prospects that I would say I value more than Peavy. The Cubs should always be looking for ways to win each year, which includes not stripping the entire farm system for mediocre talent. Peavy is not mediocre talent. He's the type of player you should be willing to part with prospects to improve your team. If we had guys like Jay Bruce or Cameron Maybin in our system, it might be hard to consider pulling the trigger on a deal. But, the truth of the matter is that none of our prospects (including Vitters) is so valuable that you should nix a deal for a guy of Peavy's talent. As bad as the farm system is right now, it's possible that Towers would view any sort of trade as not enough to swing a deal. If that's the case, oh well. But, Hendry should be exploring every opportunity (excluding Soto) to make a deal happen.

The Padres gave us Ceda for less than a half year of Todd Walker. I still believe it would take something along the lines of Pie, Theriot, Marshall and Vitters. Even if the deal required Ceda be included, I don't know what Hendry would be waiting for other than hoping to land him for less. The time to win is NOW.

Isn't the whole point of trading Greene to get out from his salary? For the most part, yes. The one caveat we haven't seen yet with this Peavy deal is the possibility of having to digest the full amount of Greene's contract to make the deal happen. If the market isn't showing interest in Greene, that might be the only way to rid themselves of that contract. Granted, it's possible that the Cubs could pull a prospect out of the deal if we are helping San Diego rid their contracts, but I'm not sure how much money Hendry realistically has to play with this offseason, and whether taking Peavy and Greene allows him to spend elsewhere.

If that's all it took, this deal should have been done yesterday. It's going to cost a couple more prospects along with that package. But, it would still be more than worth it.

Yes. But I believe that a sandwich pick does not cost the team a draft pick. I believe that was changed this past year. That's why people would rather see Howry be a "B" pick rather than an "A". Teams are more willing to sign "B" players before the arby dates because it doesn't cost them any compensation.

Why exactly should the LA Dodgers care how Manny did or didn't play in Boston? What would make them want to pee in Manny's Cheerios? Was the lack of motivation in Boston really a money thing? I don't believe that to be true. To me, and I suppose I could be wrong, he went from an organization that seemed more willing to be rid of him and then to an organization who seemed to want him. It's hard to get motivated to go out and play your best everyday when the organization you play for doesn't see the value you bring. And I need to understand how Manny did this to Cleveland, also. In his final season in Cleveland, he posted: .351/.457/.697 For the value he can provide to a team, the teams who can can afford $20m would be stupid to assume that they would automatically get the displaced Boston Manny instead of the inspired LA Manny. Hendry has my blessing to give Manny whatever sum of money he will want to be a Cub in 2009. Good Morning, Obviously you do not listen to the baseball channel on XM radio. Basically Manny is about Manny. He wanted the last two years of his contract voided because they were club options for the paltry sum of $20 million a year. When the red sox told him they did not want to void them he basically quit on them, hid out in the training room, mouthed off to the press, and forced them to dump him. If you will look a the games before he got traded Manny was not in the lineup because his so called injury was not healing. Of course when he got traded to the Dodgers he got well overnight. In addition, because he had to agree to the trade, the club options had to be removed from his contract so he could be a free agent at the end of the season. I have never heard Kennedy?Dibble rip a player like they did Manny while all of this transpired. Here he was in Boston, his team in the middle of a pennant race, and he was all about Manny and the money. They cut to the chase pretty quickly and called it what it really was. A selfish, non-team player who wanted more money and would do anything, including quitting on the team that is currently paying him, quitting on his team mates in a pennant race, to get what he wanted. They also mentioned he did something similar to that when he left Cleveland. Sorry, you can point to his numbers all day long. And I am sure Hank Steinbrenner will be forgiving, but Manny could rot on the vine before I would want him playing for me. I have coached too many years to put up with the kind of garbage Manny gives out, it is not fair to the other players on the team. 99% of the players in MLB are all about themselves. Manny isn't unique in that aspect. Boston is the team that offered irrevocable waivers on Manny a few years back, meaning anyone could have him if they could afford to take his contract. That's the kind of respect Boston showed for Manny. And I'll post stats all day long, because the bottom line is what kind of production a player provides for the money they make. A GM/manager probably shouldn't have to stroke a guy's ego after they sign on the dotted line. But, no two people are alike. Manny appears to be a little more needy in the stroked ego department than other ballplayers. If that's all it takes to make him want to go out and perform to the best of his abilities, then by all means, stroke his freakin' ego. Manny is going to leave this game as one of the greatest to ever play this game. A guy who can post SLG's over .600 7 of the last 10 years (and very close to .600 in two other years) deserves more respect than he has been given over the years. As far as the money, the best way to make a player happy is to extend their contract. I suppose you can't blame Boston if they didn't want to talk extension with Manny, but the day you inform the player that you are no longer wanted, that changes your outlook of that organization. And that can definitely impact your motivation. I'll take Manny in LF for the Cubs next year all day long. You go out and get yourself Raul Ibanez and we'll just see who has the more productive LFer next year. In the meantime, here are the current standings: Great Production 162-0 Mediocre Production 81-81 Positive Attitude 0-162

Why exactly should the LA Dodgers care how Manny did or didn't play in Boston? What would make them want to pee in Manny's Cheerios? Was the lack of motivation in Boston really a money thing? I don't believe that to be true. To me, and I suppose I could be wrong, he went from an organization that seemed more willing to be rid of him and then to an organization who seemed to want him. It's hard to get motivated to go out and play your best everyday when the organization you play for doesn't see the value you bring. And I need to understand how Manny did this to Cleveland, also. In his final season in Cleveland, he posted: .351/.457/.697 For the value he can provide to a team, the teams who can can afford $20m would be stupid to assume that they would automatically get the displaced Boston Manny instead of the inspired LA Manny. Hendry has my blessing to give Manny whatever sum of money he will want to be a Cub in 2009.

You could always just give Howry the Todd Walker treatment. The Padres offered him arby last year. No one took it. The Padres lost their arbitration hearing and then proceeded to send Walker packing.

On a realistic scale, when you left it was a 5/100. Now its.... I don't know.. 15-20/100 well, damn... I'm not sure those numbers are accurate. Peavy's short list of teams he would accept a trade to are Cubs, Dodgers, St. Louis, Houston and Atlanta, I believe. Atlanta and St. Louis excused themselves from the discussion. Houston is more than likely out of the picture due to a lack of talent, leaving it up to LA and Chicago as the two teams that the Padres could more easily deal with and have Peavy's approval. LA is a division rival and San Diego will likely pillage LA's top prospects to even be agreeable to a deal, leaving the Cubs in the driver's seat. CC Sabathia could be more appealing to LA due to his free agent status and his desire to be on the West Coast, which secures the Cubs position in the driver's seat. I'd put the scale a little closer to 50/100. They have the talent to get Peavy. The question will become how ridiculous the demands will be and whether Hendry is willing to part with said demands.

This would make sense for them as well. I believe I read somewhere that CC's preference this offseason would be to play for a West Coast team. That should undoubtedly put the Dodgers and Angels in front of the rest of MLB in the Sabathia sweepstakes.

You end up giving up young talent to acquire Peavy but get two draft picks for letting Dempster go. Well, since you put it that way, now you've got me all excited. BRB, got to go change my underpants.

I'm not as excited about Burnett as everyone else seems to be, especially for the crazy money teams are lined up to pay him. Assuming Dempster's year wasn't a total fluke, Dempster will be $3-$4 million cheaper per year for 1-2 less years. You really think Burnett is going to go for insane money? I certainly see Sheets and Sabathia going for insane dollar amounts, but i'm not sure how I feel about Burnett. He had his worst year since 03 last year so possibly his price tag will be a little less? Or maybe that's just wishful thinking. Isn't Burnett giving up big money to opt out in the first place? I can't imagine he'd opt out and take less money to sign somewhere else. But, I don't know what his current contract looks like, so maybe he isn't giving up big money by opting out.

You have to figure that the Cubs would have a better shot at this point than the Dodgers. The Dodgers and Padres aren't as comparable as a rivalry in the Cubs/Cardinals mode, but they are a rivalry of a decent proportion. Dodgers fans and the organization itself are a bit "meh" when it comes to the Padres, while Padres fans hate the Dodgers. Namely because the Padres have never been a longstanding threat to the Dodgers. They are two completely different teams economically. With that said, the Padres will want a boatload of talent from the Dodgers. I'm just not going to get excited about this at this point, because I'm not convinced Hendry will be willing to put together the necessary package to complete a trade. You would think that it wouldn't be that hard to pull the trigger on what amounts to a few really talented players and a couple of players that probably don't even figure into the team's long term plans. Maybe it's just the horrible 3 and out playoff showing that has me more skeptical than I normally am. I guess I'm playing my Jim Hendry card and wearing my emotion cards close to the vest. It does appear as though it will come down to trading for Peavy or resigning Dempster.