RedFlash

While I do agree that Dempster will be a high risk/high reward in 2009 I think he is a better value to the Cubs then say AJ Burnett. We've talked about before, but Dempster clearly has the stuff---even when he was closing---to be a very good starting pitcher. IDK if Demp will be AS good in 2009 as he was in 2008, but I don't see a Carl Pavano here. I believe Dempster next four yrs will be his best of his career. It's a risk, and if Dempster didn't have the talent he does have, then I would suggest we move on, but clearly Demp has the talent to pitch at this level. The question is: will he? I think he does. Give me Burnett over Dempster. Burnett has been starting for a long time and has been consistent doing it. He also has better stuff than Dempster. They're both the same age with Burnett being only a couple months older. Based on talent, yes I would take Burnett over Dempster, but this is a Lou Piniella led team and I could see personality conflicts between Piniella and the wild child AJ Burnett. So in the end the Cube feel Dempster is a better FIT---not saying is a better talent---for the club over somebody like Burnett.

While I do agree that Dempster will be a high risk/high reward in 2009 I think he is a better value to the Cubs then say AJ Burnett. We've talked about before, but Dempster clearly has the stuff---even when he was closing---to be a very good starting pitcher. IDK if Demp will be AS good in 2009 as he was in 2008, but I don't see a Carl Pavano here. I believe Dempster next four yrs will be his best of his career. It's a risk, and if Dempster didn't have the talent he does have, then I would suggest we move on, but clearly Demp has the talent to pitch at this level. The question is: will he? I think he does.

Why are people skeptical over Dempster possible not being as good next yr as he was this yr? I mean after looking it up, Dempster's 2008 is not that far off from Chris Carpenter 2005 numbers. Yes I went there. Like Carpenter I believe Demspter is a late bloomer as a starter and that the next four yrs will be his best four of his career regardless of where he signs.

LOL.

Those comments by Love has a certain Dusty logic to it. How a coach can be so nonchalant about a blow out loss is quite disturbing.

Yeah, but Portland is extremely high on Fernandez and doubtful he would be available.

Churchill's guy may put the Cubs at 5% chance of landing Peavy, but I put the Yankees less then that at getting Peavy. Which means it still comes down to the Braves or the Cubs. The Yankees are strictly used for negotiation tatics, imo. I think it depends on CC. Even so, I still don't see Peavy accepting a trade to the Yankees.

Churchill's guy may put the Cubs at 5% chance of landing Peavy, but I put the Yankees less then that at getting Peavy. Which means it still comes down to the Braves or the Cubs. The Yankees are strictly used for negotiation tatics, imo.

This would be an awesome trade. We'd have cap space (Raef I think its an 11m expiring) to make a run at Boozer or even Kobe if he opts out, and we could resign Gordon if he keeps playing well. Oh............hell yes, pull that damn trigger Paxson. Not so much because of the exp contract--which is nice---but I love to get Sergio Rodriguez on the Bulls. And no UMFan, I don't want Kobe. Not because he can't still bring it, or his past, it because getting Kobe the window of opportunity would be short. I would prefer to go after somebody like Bosh in 2010.

Playing IN San Diego and playing FOR San Diego are two totally different personal desires, and based on what we know, I'd be willing to bet Peavy is more of the playing IN San Diego camp. I mean have you been there? The weather is perfect. I'm surprised free agents don't clamor to sign there... But it's probably because they like playing for contenders, which San Diego most certainly is not, and which is why I'm also willing to bet Peavy is dying to go to a real team that can contend for a championship, which is why I can see him agreeing to a trade to the AL if it's the Angels (since they won't trade him to the Dodgers) Peavy makes enough money that he can move his family no problem, I'm sure. And if Donnie's story is true, it doesn't sound like they really care where they go to as long as it's a contender (or Atlanta [orToronto]). why would he consider toronto? In the AL East they fail to sign burnett or any other FA pitchers why would he even bother they then even with peavy at least two bats and probably arm away from contending with the Rays or Bo Sox let alone a re-arming yankees. If the Bo Sox are able to get involved with any gusto he's heading there. Too many overhyped prospects and overhyped players not for it to happen. Boston has as much chance at landing Peavy as the Yankees. Which means....they have NO SHOT at landing Peavy. If Giles can veto a trade to Boston yoou can almost bet with all certaintly that Boston would get the same treatment from Peavy.

I wonder if this is a subtle jab at Babich? :-k

Wow............what a disturbing game. No way is the Packers a 34 point win better then the Bears. It looks to me the Bears didn't seem to care.

Negotiation ploy for both teams. There is a slim chance Peavy will accept a trade to NY. Not to mention NY has their hands in almost every free agent pitcher, so trying to trade for Peavy would be a last resort, ie every major free agent pitcher refuse to sign with them.

A couple of thoughts about this statement: 1: If a deal is done then why wait on the announcement? I know if I had acquire a top 5 pitcher in baseball, I would announced it to my team's fanbase as soon as possibile. So this statment is bullcrap. 2: I read Donnie's story, and he never said a "deal is done" all he reported was where Peavy would like to go, and the chances of him being trading. So this blog is taking liberties with Donnie story. But hey we are less then 15 pages to 100, we needed something to get us there...So let's reach 100 before the night is over, guys. lol the joker from the cub reporter linked to this post and trashed you. hey rob g, your site is a joke. thanks for playng. I know I just saw that, and boy was he defensive.

A couple of thoughts about this statement: 1: If a deal is done then why wait on the announcement? I know if I had acquire a top 5 pitcher in baseball, I would announced it to my team's fanbase as soon as possibile. So this statment is bullcrap. 2: I read Donnie's story, and he never said a "deal is done" all he reported was where Peavy would like to go, and the chances of him being trading. So this blog is taking liberties with Donnie story. But hey we are less then 15 pages to 100, we needed something to get us there...So let's reach 100 before the night is over, guys.

Dumping Michael Wuertz? Did I miss something? Same here....

I think this thought has some merit given that Wren has pulled the Braves out of the Peavy sweepstakes. (If you believe they are actually out)

Why would you think that, because they happened on the same day? I don't see how you can't think Gregg is the answer to Wood being let go. Unless you're in the Padres crave a 5M mediocre closer camp. I don't see how this means "we're done with the bullpen this offseason". God, I hope we are. SSR, I take it you don't have faith in Hendry building a bullpen?

I not afraid to say it....Rose will be better then both Paul and Williams. Rose is already bigger and stronger then Paul, and faster and more athlethic then Deron Williams. So yes, I do think Rose will eventually be better then both Paul and Williams. Same could be said about Mike Conley Jr. as can be said about a lot of point guards in the league. paul's key gifts are his speed and athleticism while williams's attributes are his size and strength (and court vision). you can't say that rose is better based on the fact that he's better than those two in those particlular categories. rose has a long way to go to measure up to the league's young marquee point guards. rose lacks the pure speed of paul and the court vision and instincts of williams and the handles of both--those are the skills and talents that make those two guys great. williams, btw, has a higher dribble than any other point guard in the league, it's hard to teach that kind of skill. I think his instincts are fine. So I'm not afraid to say it, I believe Rose will be a better PG then Paul and Williams. Before the draft I heard one comparasion I thought was intriguing (and it doesn't include Paul or Williams) is that one basketball site comapre Rose to a hybrid of Jason Kidd/Dwayne Wade. So if Paxson doesn't screw it up, that when Rose finishes up his sopho season (which would be the offseason of themonster offseason) his play is going to be a MAJOR asset to the Bulls as they try to lure a big time free agent to Chicago. I'm not saying he will, but it wouldn't surprise me if by 2010, LBJ wants to play with a PG like Rose over heading East to a team like the Knicks or Nets.

. It's already happened at least once with Glavine and the Mets. Yeah, but wasn't Glavine the MLBPA President when he signed that contract? Besides am I the only one who hopes the Yankees---with all their money and a new stadium---swing and miss on every major free agent this yr? I wouldn't mind seeing so more egg on Hank Steinbrenner face.

I'm actually on the opposite side, I hope the Yankees swing and miss and EVERY major free agent. I could see a pic of Hank Steinbrenner with a sad face and two sack full of money with the headline, "Why won't anybody take my money." That would be hilarious.

Only two guys on that list that were/still are available to the Cubs that I would want would be Street and Affeldt. Both would be upgrades over Gregg. Everybody else on that list are either unavailable (Madson), expensive to acquire (Rays relievers) or not an upgrade at all (Lyon, Oliver, Springer---who has said it's either St. Lou or retirement, unless that's changed). Heilman would be intriguing, but if a bullpen starved Mets team is willing to trade Heilman, what does that say to you?

Ohhh, its just that easy? I didn't say it would be easy, I just said if he can. I'm not holding out hope he can though. I not ready to cry bloody murder at Hendry for trading prolly an overrated prospect (in a decent farm system, he's likely a 10-15 overall prospect) for a reliever who should/will help the Cubs in 2009.

Although I don't want Gregg as a closer (ideally 7th inning/backup closer), this move will turn out to be a nice under the radar move for the Cubs provided they keep Gregg. The biggest thing Roths will work on with Gregg is lowering the walks of Gregg. If Gregg can lower his walk totals, then he can become a really good reliever.

Uh...........the White Sox? Dotel at $5 million and Linebrink at $4 million, perhaps?