cubsfan26

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=3758577&type=blogEntry Padres are ready to move on this, Philles are ready to move on this, yet where not close. Only holdup is the Cubs at this point. Is it because Marquis isn't in this deal and has to be dealt first? Yup that sounds like what the issue is, we probably can't fit Peavy in the budget without trading at least a chunk of Marquis contract.

http://csnchicago.com/pages/new_landing/?Chuck-Garfiens-MLB-Winter-Meetings-Blog=1&blockID=20047&feedID=661 It is now... 6:37. What's going on? I assume Hendry has met with the media yet, he could be still talking with Towers. Sportsnite said they would break in with news if anything happend.

http://csnchicago.com/pages/new_landing/?Chuck-Garfiens-MLB-Winter-Meetings-Blog=1&blockID=20047&feedID=661

FWIW Comcast sportsnet is reporting a deal is close to happening.

The idea is to not get swept in the postseason. The more good talent you add, the more likely it is to win - though that's certainly not the only factor. I'm mostly tongue-in-cheek on the "too much" thing, but the odds of any individual player being the difference in a five-game playoff series is almost nil. You're a big fan of regressions. How do we even know the Cubs will get into the playoffs without Peavy and Bradley? DeRosa should regress, Soto could regress, Theriot could regress, Ramirez should have an age related regression, Lee etc. The pen is already worse than last years shaky one, Dempster and Harden you said yourself should regress. Never take making the playoffs for granted. I agree who would have thought that the 2004 Cubs would have missed the playoffs? Plus nobody can predict a players health, or what type of fluke injuries could happen. You just have to put the best team possible on the field, especially if you wanna win now. You can't think about 2-3 years down the line, because you never know what will happen. The way I look at it, there's a very good chance Peavy could be a huge bargin in 2011 at 16m, same with Bradley at 8m. I think we gotta keep in mind that the Cubs would be trading one top prospect, who might or might not be a good major leaguer. Were not emptying the farm, were trading one top prospect(who would be 3rd-5th best prospect in most farm systems), and spare parts for one of the best young pitchers in baseball about to enter his prime. You absolutely can, and should, think about 2-3 years down the line. But that should not prevent the Cubs from committing financially to guys like this. You can think 2-3 years down the line, but you can't let it stop you from making good moves that make sense.That would be like Hendry scared of trading Choi, because he might be a younger cheap and better player then Derrek Lee. The point I'm trying to make is Vitters isn't a untouchable type prospect at this point, he or Peavy salary shouldn't stop you from making the trade.

The idea is to not get swept in the postseason. The more good talent you add, the more likely it is to win - though that's certainly not the only factor. I'm mostly tongue-in-cheek on the "too much" thing, but the odds of any individual player being the difference in a five-game playoff series is almost nil. You're a big fan of regressions. How do we even know the Cubs will get into the playoffs without Peavy and Bradley? DeRosa should regress, Soto could regress, Theriot could regress, Ramirez should have an age related regression, Lee etc. The pen is already worse than last years shaky one, Dempster and Harden you said yourself should regress. Never take making the playoffs for granted. I agree who would have thought that the 2004 Cubs would have missed the playoffs? Plus nobody can predict a players health, or what type of fluke injuries could happen. You just have to put the best team possible on the field, especially if you wanna win now. You can't think about 2-3 years down the line, because you never know what will happen. The way I look at it, there's a very good chance Peavy could be a huge bargin in 2011 at 16m, same with Bradley at 8m. I think we gotta keep in mind that the Cubs would be trading one top prospect, who might or might not be a good major leaguer. Were not emptying the farm, were trading one top prospect(who would be 3rd-5th best prospect in most farm systems), and spare parts for one of the best young pitchers in baseball about to enter his prime.

http://hotstove.mlblogs.com/archives/2008/12/peavy_talks_slowing.html Basically same report we been hearing all day from the Cubs sources. But Towers comments kinda said otherwise.

As long as Towers is still optimistic that a deal can be worked out, then I'm as well. I think this deal is gonna take a little while to get done(maybe to tomorrow night or Thursday, if at all), so waiting for every update is just gonna drive everybody nuts. We all need to relax and just wait and see what happens.

Yeah I seen him mention the ownership issues over the last few days as well.

The fact that Rosenthal keeps bringing up the new owners stuff makes me not pay much attention to his information. Other sources and even the Cubs themselves said the ownership situation won't effect what their doing this offseason. The Cubs are unlikely to have a new owner for a few months. So does that mean we can't make trades or sign players? That just doesn't make much sense to me.

Vitters, DeRosa, Marshall, Pie and Cedeno or a reliever is alot. I hope Hendry either keeps Vitters or Marshall out of this trade somehow. Since DeRosa now seems to be in the deal.

Maybe, but Bruce did say that there was nothing to the Cubs rumored interest in him. Yeah I'm not sure what they will do, but I doubt Hendry would just hand Fontenot the job next year. He would probably bring someone in to play with him if that happen.

Dear God no. I don't think it would be a horrible idea, Aurilia hit 321/377/903 against LH pitching last year.

If we trade DeRosa in a package for Peavy, I wonder if Rich Aurilia or Ray Durham will be signed to platoon with Fontenot at 2b.

Towers comments kinda scare me a little bit. He made it sound like the Cubs could have some issues agreeing to this trade. Would everyone still be happy with the deal if we ended up trading Vitters,Pie, Guzman, Marshall, DeRosa and Marquis to for Peavy and average prospect? Because I can see something like Marquis(with cash), Vitters, Olson, Happ, and Marshall to Padres. DeRosa to Phillies, and Pie and Guzman to the Orioles with Peavy and prospect to the Cubs. Personally I think that could be too much to give up, and would Guzman or Marshall at least out of the deal.

The Cubs might have to wait until some free agent pitchers sign before Marquis has value. There's too much pitching on the market right now still.

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/weblogs/padres/2008/dec/07/padres-and-cubs-still-involved/?padres http://www.fannation.com/si_blogs/hot_stove/posts/30021

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/baseball/cubs/1319247,CST-SPT-cub08.article

I'm not concerned at all about Peavy goin to the Brewers. Yes the city is close to Chicago, but there's a big difference between the cities and playing for the Cubs. So I find it really unlikely that Peavy would consider waving his no-trade to come to the Brewers. These latest rumors basically sound like the writer trying to find good fits for Peavy, without any actual fact or inside information. If Peavy was really willing to go to the Brewers we would have heard them in trade talks before today. A trade to the Angels is somewhat possible, but probably unlikely for two reasons. The Angels have been unwilling to trade top prospects or young talent in the past, and I can see them doing the same thing with Peavy. Plus who's If Peavy would even be willing to play in the AL.

How come? Marquis has gone 23-18 with a 4.43 era in 61 starts the last two years. Some team needing a starter is gonna be interested in him at 6m or so. If the Cubs want something of value in return, then they might need to eat more then 4m. But otherwise I'm pretty confident they can get rid of Marquis pretty easily. FWIW Bruce Levine said on the radio today, he expects Marquis traded at the Winter Meetings.

I can't see Gaudin non-tendered. He's 25 years old with experience both as a starter and a reliever. If he was non-tendered, he would be snapped up in 5 minutes. I would think Wuertz would be a better candidate for being traded since he was in Lou's doghouse last year. I think he's more likely to be traded than non-tendered. But when you're likely to be as much as $5M over budget, the $3M Gaudin's likely to get through arbitration is meaningful. My preference would be to see Gaudin and Marshall held and Cotts and/or Wuertz traded, but I doubt that's possible with a Peavy trade. Would Gaudin get that much of a raise though? He made 1.7m last year, and got a solid raise because he was a SP most of 07. Since he was a reliever most of 08, and overall had a subpar year. I could see him agreeing to something like 2.2-2.3m for 09. I also heard Gregg might make more in the 4-4.5m range, he blew 9 saves and lost his closer job in September. So I can't see him getting a huge raise either. If Gregg only makes something like 4.3m, and Gaudin makes something like 2.2m. It would allow them to trade or nontender Wuertz and stay in the 148-149m range. Plus they can also backload their RF a little bit more for 09. Especially with there being a good chance we get a RF for a bargin 7-9m price, with the market so bad right now. If we could pick up Scott from the O's, we could solve the RF problem cheaply. I would love to get the Peavy deal done, get Scott, and re-sign Wood to a 1-year deal. I doubt we could get Scott cheaply. His salary might be cheap, but I have a feeling MacPhail will want a good prospect or two in return for him. Scott is basically a platoon player, and will probably put up numbers simliar to what Edmonds did last year or a little better. I wouldn't mind adding him but there are better options out there. I'd take him for Kevin Hart, Mike Wuertz, Ronny Cedeno, Randy Wells or Jose Ascanio, but I wouldn't give up much more then that. I don't see why everyone wants to get a cheap RF so we can bring Wood back though. The guy was very good last year, and good many years with the Cubs. But it's time to move on, paying him 9m out of the pen can go to better use. If it's another reliever not named Kerry Wood, very few would want him back at 9m for next year. I think the pen is set unless we trade Marshall or he goes to the rotation full-time. If that happens we might add a veteran LH specialist cheap.

I agree 100%. Do you think Kerry would oblige? If so, I'd much rather hold on to Pie, Gaudin, and Wood than sign an Abreu or Ibanez. Anyone think a deal could be made with the Padres that didn't include Pie? If so, even better. Sounds like Pie would go to the third team for pitcher that we would send to the Padres, in a potential Peavy trade.

Problem could be if both Pie and Fukudome struggle, and Fontenot hits more like he did 07 we could have issues. Especially if DeRosa and Theriot aren't as good offensivly next year. So you can either have a quality bat, or a quality extra reliever late in the game. For 9m I would rather take the quality bat, especially with Pie rumored to be in the deal to get Peavy. If the Cubs had a better idea of what Fukudome would do next year, I think they would consider giving Pie more of a chance. Plus we all know how Lou wants a good LH bat for the middle of the order.

I can't see Gaudin non-tendered. He's 25 years old with experience both as a starter and a reliever. If he was non-tendered, he would be snapped up in 5 minutes. I would think Wuertz would be a better candidate for being traded since he was in Lou's doghouse last year. I think he's more likely to be traded than non-tendered. But when you're likely to be as much as $5M over budget, the $3M Gaudin's likely to get through arbitration is meaningful. My preference would be to see Gaudin and Marshall held and Cotts and/or Wuertz traded, but I doubt that's possible with a Peavy trade. Would Gaudin get that much of a raise though? He made 1.7m last year, and got a solid raise because he was a SP most of 07. Since he was a reliever most of 08, and overall had a subpar year. I could see him agreeing to something like 2.2-2.3m for 09. I also heard Gregg might make more in the 4-4.5m range, he blew 9 saves and lost his closer job in September. So I can't see him getting a huge raise either. If Gregg only makes something like 4.3m, and Gaudin makes something like 2.2m. It would allow them to trade or nontender Wuertz and stay in the 148-149m range. Plus they can also backload their RF a little bit more for 09. Especially with there being a good chance we get a RF for a bargin 7-9m price, with the market so bad right now.

I dunno if this is posted yet, but it's a interview with Kevin Towers. http://www.sportsline.com/mcc/blogs/entry/6270335/12089484