RedFlash

The Padres cannot be serious if that is the offer they like from the Braves. Neither Reyes or Morton has ever been considered high caliber arms (neither has ever been ranked in the Top 10 in the Braves systsem. I mean if the Cubs can't beat a package that includes Reyes or Morton then they don't deserve Peavy.

Please don't tell me OH stands for Orioles Hangout. No, it stands for "Oh, Hell" as in, "Oh, hell not again."

nilodnayr, I narrow the names to players who would actually be productive to the Cubs next yr in order of preference: Hawpe Jeremy Hermida Luke Scott Seth Smith McLouth DeJesus: Ryan Sweeney Randy Winn Adam Lind Gabe Gross Raul Ibanez

Not sure there's anything to back that statement up. Where have you heard that Dempster is a "priority" as opposed to Peavy via trade or any other FA pitcher? I would take Peavy or Lowe over Dempster any day. I don't think the Cubs are putting all of their eggs in the Dempster basket by any means. But maybe you've read or seen something I haven't. In which case, please share. I don't have the time to find all the relevant articles, but Jim Hendry has made it abundantly clear that his priorities this off-season are re-signing Dempster and Wood. yeah, but Dempster has made it pretty clear that he plans to test the market and doesn't plan on signing anytime soon Which means, if the Cubs do acquire Peavy it would allow them to either be patient with Dempster in free agency or allow the Cubs to thank Dempster for his contributions and move on to other priorities, which I hope they do. Agreed, but I don't think they can obtain both of them or will because of the need of the left handed bat I really would like a quick resolution on Peavy, because if it drags out too long, then Cubs could lose the chance to sign Furcal (which I hope they sign) and perhaps lose Dempster (w or w/o getting Peavy) and maybe even Ibanez or Hermida. I'm hoping for a resolution before Thanksgiving, but considering the options for where the Padres can trade Peavy to, I almost something to get down long before Thanksgiving, or the Padres pull Peavy from the table. Like most, if the Cubs can end November with Peavy, Furcal, Ibanez or Hermida (emphsis on Hermida being the first option) I wouldn't care if the Cubs were quiet from December to Spring training.

Not sure there's anything to back that statement up. Where have you heard that Dempster is a "priority" as opposed to Peavy via trade or any other FA pitcher? I would take Peavy or Lowe over Dempster any day. I don't think the Cubs are putting all of their eggs in the Dempster basket by any means. But maybe you've read or seen something I haven't. In which case, please share. I don't have the time to find all the relevant articles, but Jim Hendry has made it abundantly clear that his priorities this off-season are re-signing Dempster and Wood. yeah, but Dempster has made it pretty clear that he plans to test the market and doesn't plan on signing anytime soon Which means, if the Cubs do acquire Peavy it would allow them to either be patient with Dempster in free agency or allow the Cubs to thank Dempster for his contributions and move on to other priorities, which I hope they do.

Tell me where I commented on the quality of Bellhorn's career as a whole. Wait...you can't? That might be because I didn't say it. I simply pointed out that you were wrong when you said he had one good year and was never heard from again. Lighten up, Francis. And I doubt that his success in 2004 had much to do with the "AL not having a big book" on him. It probably had a lot to do with his .364 BABIP. Considering interleague play, video footage, scouting, etc....I'm sure that AL pitchers were well aware of what type of hitter Bellhorn was. Fine, he has two yrs, and has been heard from again. And when I mean "haven't been heard from again" I mean production wise. Otherwise, he has bounce around, but as a productive player, he has been from since 2004. Is that better, is that more defined? Second: No you didn't comment on Bellhorn's career, I pointed out that just because Ludwick had one extremely lucky yr, he could be compare to Bellhorn in the sesne of how unlikely his season was. I mention the unlikeliness of Ludwick repeated that success, and I used Bellhorn as a comparasion, and it's a valid comp.

Ask the 2004 Red Sox if they've heard of Mark Bellhorn. BoSox could name you everybody from that team from Martinez to Papelbon to Mueller to Youk. So that proves nothing. The point is that Bellhorn had more than one good year. So he had one fluke yr in terms of power, and one decent yr in his 10 yr career. Coincidently his two best yrs ame in his first yr with the Cubs and the Sox. After the first yr, he went to crappy out. 2 decent yrs and 8 crappy ones, do not a career make. Bellhorn is a crappy player who got by on the NL not having a book on him in 2002, and the AL not having a big book in 2004, but once the book was out, Bellhorn stunk. I'm not trying to make a case for Ludwick. I actually agree with points 2 and 3 that you made above. But your first point wasn't accurate.

Ask the 2004 Red Sox if they've heard of Mark Bellhorn. BoSox could name you everybody from that team from Martinez to Papelbon to Mueller to Youk. So that proves nothing.

Im curious abou the Cubs young pitching. Mashall? Ceda? Atkins? Papelbon? Would it cause a massive NSBB uproar if Jay Jackson was involved? No, not even close. It can involve any pitcher not named Marmol and there will be no uproar. Jackson can't be traded til June. If I'm not mistaken, he could be a PTBNL if the Padres are willing to accept that, and if the Cubs are willing to include him. But they could theortically get around the rule by something like a normal deal for Peavy (the pieces we've heard so far) and no PTBNL, then say around January 30th or so (provided they haven't traded him yet) trade 2 minor league players to be named later (with one of them expected to be Jay Jackson) to the Padres for Khalil Greene. Make the trade for Greene in late January (if Greene is still available) you then have the 6 months to conclude the trade, which would coincide with Jackson being available to trade by June 26th (which according to cubs.com is when he signed). Trade one: Peavy for Marshall/Theriot/Pie/Ceda Trade two on late Jan/Early Feb: Greene to the Cubs for Jackson/prospect (who both will officially announced in June). That way the Padres could get prospect(s) they like who are not available now, indirectly for Peavy. Again I said theoritically. Don't know how ethical it would be to circumvent the rules like that.

thought this was kinda of upsetting...almost making it sound like they won't sign Demp or Trade for Peavy. To me it sounds like Hendry has a continguency plan IN CASE they don't re-sign Demp or trade for Peavy. It doesn't read they won't, just that they have a plan in place in case neither happens. Yeah true, but still that contingency plan scares me. I dont want a rotation of Z, Harden, Lily, Marshall, Samarazija Before getting scared about what the potential rotation looks like, let's see if Hendry "gets his man."

Just a thought would be a nice 5 hitter, but I'd rather have a left handed bat. Could be kind of easy to obtain though. 1: He reeks of Mark Bellhorn. One unexpectedly good yr, never to hear from again. 2: Cards won't trade him to the Cubs unless they get the Cubs to overpay for him. 3: I prefer Hermida, as do many on this board.

The sources who've said that resigning Demp and trading for Peavy would be our preference, with the new addition of us being willing to go 4 years. I am more then willing to let Dempster walk if the Cubs land Peavy. P/Z/H/L would still leave the Cubs with the best rotation in the NL at the very least, and arguably the best in baseball. Take what money that would be use on Dempster and sign Furcal, and see about acquiring Hermida and call it an offseason.

thought this was kinda of upsetting...almost making it sound like they won't sign Demp or Trade for Peavy. To me it sounds like Hendry has a continguency plan IN CASE they don't re-sign Demp or trade for Peavy. It doesn't read they won't, just that they have a plan in place in case neither happens.

Hyperthetically speaking, if the Cubs do acquire Peavy, what makes people think the Cubs will re-sign Ryan Dempster? Quite frankly, I'm not that high on having 1/3 or so of the payroll tied up with the rotation. I understand Marquis would be dealt to make room, but personally if the Cubs got Peavy I much rather let Dempster walk and bring back Wood, instead of bring back Dempster and let Wood walk. What I am saying is....I doubt this is a case of get Peavy and keep Dempster. I think this is a case of either Peavy OR keeping Dempster. And I believe Dempster has made that decision for the Cubs.

Gotta be one of the next five. Five game home stand coming up, then 6/7 on the road in the WEST. Circus trip for the lose. Ugh, the circus trip should be ugly. Hey atleast the Bulls could have a chance at DeRozan, Harden or Andrew Ogilvy Why would we want Ogilvy? I didn't say I would, it would be based on where the Bulls will end up in the draft. Right now we wouldn't take Ovilvy because the Bulls are looking like a top 5 lottery pick this yr.

Gotta be one of the next five. Five game home stand coming up, then 6/7 on the road in the WEST. Circus trip for the lose. Ugh, the circus trip should be ugly. Hey atleast the Bulls could have a chance at DeRozan, Harden or Andrew Ogilvy

I'd happily make that deal for Peavy. Me too. My guess is, if Hendry replace Hill with Marshall and add an arm like Ceda, Towers could be interested if the Cubs take back Greene. I would love for something to happen this week (considering Towers has said he wants to trade Peavy quickly), but something tells me this will drag into December.

I agree, I think the Padres would take that deal and run for the hills if they can get it, but will Hendry offer it? I think he will. You possibly recoup some of those prospects by offer arby to Dempster and maybe Howry (if some team is supid enough to sign him before the Cubs offer). Even if you don't offer Howry, you still would get two draft picks for Dempster. So offering that deal of Theriot/Pie/Marshall/Vitters for a reasonably signed for the forseeible future Peavy is a pretty much a bargain. I'd understand if Peavy was a soon-to-be-free agent, but Peavy is under contract till 2011/12 so giving up the young talent to get Peavy would be justified. And Hendry let Towers win at golf today, if you play.

Well, atleast Hendry throw the Cubs officially into the ring for Peavy. And while that is legitimately a low-ball offer, it is still a better offer then what the A's got for Tim Hudson (Thomas/Meyer and Juan Cruz). My guess it the Cubs will have to included both Ceda and/or Vitters to go with Cedeno, Pie and Marshall if they want Towers to take their offer seriously. Personally with th recent news that Peavy has said he would approve a trade to the Yankees/Angels, I believe this is a bluff. The Padres know that of the original 5 teams Peavy would approve a trade, only two would have even legitimate prospects to offer, and they are not the Dodgers. I mean Braves/Dodgers/Cubs/Astros/Cardinals. As debated, Astros was the first to be eliminated as they barely ave enough to acquire a guy like Maddux much less Peavy. The Cards do have intriguing prospects (Perez/Rasmus, etc) but the Cards are more interested in developing them instead of trading them. The Braves want Peavy, but are not willing to part with the top prospects (they'd be stupid, they would have Peavy for several yrs and could recoup these prospects by 2010-11), the Dodgers are the Dodgers and unless their willng to overpay for Peavy, they are looking harder at CC. So of the original 5, only two have legitimate possibility at Peavy, Braves and the Cubs. So you have one team with the legitimate prospects you want, but they are not willing to trade, and another team that have quality prospcts, but not the one blue chip you are seeking. So I bet Towers asked Peavy if he would help expediate trade talks by publicly saying he would open up the possiblity of accepting a trade to an AL teams. I think the inclusion of the Yankees/Angels to the approve list is nothing more to gt the bidding going for the Braves and the Cubs. With that said, I till expect Peavy to be Braves, because unless the Cubs are willing to include Vitters and/or Ceda in the deal, I don't see the Cubs with enough quality to cover what the Padres are looking for.

Guys I appreciate the atempt to take shots at me, and my fave univeristy. And I do think most if not all here can agree that Alabama is a top 10 top job, just based on tradition and winning. With that said, me and my fellow Bama fans were talking about it another site, and most agree that prolly the most intriguing coaching spot this offseason will be Clemson. The reason Clemson is prolly going to offer an SEC caliber contract to coach in the ACC. And let's face it you think Coaches like Butch Davis and Mike Leach are going to want to butt heads EVERY FRIGGIN WEEK in the SEC with an equal or better coach? Butch Davis, I believe will stay at UNC. Auburn: This job just isn't an intriguing job.Two words: Bobby Louder. Tennessee's job is prolly the 2nd best that will be open in the offseason. If there is an SEC team to lure Butch Davis to the conference it would be Tennessee. Otherwise, it wouldn't surprise me if either David Cutcliffe or Jon Gruden are coaching at Tennessee next yr. I think Mike Leach ends up at Clemson or stays at Tech. Bobby Johnson or David Cutcliffe ends up at Tennessee Auburn ends up with Mike Price (please, please, make it so, oh well), more likely somebody like Dabo Sweeney (or however the current Clem coach spells his name) ends up coaching Auburn. It wouldn't surprise me if Ferentz doesn't get a call from Louder and AU. Bowden I could see essentially replacing Mike Leach at Tech (not a good trade offer from the Tech perspective, but still better then Auburn's potential trade of Tuberville to whatever puppet who will say yes to Louder. I think S. Holtz will be interviewed by likely not get a call for a major job this yr, and most likely have to return to ECU and have a big yr next yr, before getting on the "everybody wants me" list.

I believe the Bears (more importantly Grossman) are going to pull a win out of their you know what's this weekend. IDK, and I am definately a frakkin fool to believe this, but I see Grossman putting up a decent game (20-31 for 250+ yrds 2 tds, and the mandatory INT). Bears winning this game in the range of 24-10, 24-17 is definately a reasonable outcome. Again, I know I am crazy to think Grossman can play a decent game, but it seems to me when the Bears backs are up against the wall, they seems to come out swinging. So I like the Bears chances against the Titans.

It wouldn't surprise me, but did Moyer also say he want to pitch till his fifty?

Ha ha ha. Nick doesn't have the budget that Pete Carroll has. But Petey has to share with Tim Floyd. Hahaha....... Nonetheless, I think Dempster is willing to shop his services, the Cubs need to go ahead and look at other possibilities.

Yeah, but nothing new, except perhaps the part about Towers wanting to move Peavy pretty quickly.

Ha ha ha. Nick doesn't have the budget that Pete Carroll has.