cubsfan26

I'd be more likely to believe the Peavy/Greene/Dye thing if Dye wasn't mentioned. I can't imagine Hendry/Lou filling RF with a righty when they seem so obsessed with getting a lefty. That rumor sounds too good to be true, we get Peavy, Greene and Dye, and were only giving up Vitters, Pie, Cedeno, Hart and Veal? Not to mention the Sox are trading Dye and a good prospect, and getting Kevin Hart and a prospect in return? The Padres are trading Peavy, Greene and a good prospect for Vitters, Pie, Cedeno,Veal and Danks or Ely? It just seems like the Padres and Sox are giving up to much, and were not nearly giving up a enough. Not to mention the media and Sox fans would be all over Kenny Williams if he traded Dye(and propsect) to the Cubs and only got back Kevin Hart and Kyle Blanks.

I heard Bruce Levine on the radio last night, and he said he didn't think Wood comments were legitimate. He said Wood agent never was willing to accept a one year deal, and was always talking about 3 years plus. Levine said if Wood was serious about staying at one year, he would have stepped in and said otherwise.

The Cubs don't want to move Soriano to RF, or have Dunn in RF. Plus I think both Lou and Hendry are looking for a hitter who makes more contact. Not to mention I think Dunn contract demands might be out of the Cubs price range. The Cubs are probably looking for a RF at a 2 or 3 year deal at probably 10-12m or less. I think Dunn is gonna want 14-15m at 4 or 5 years. So unless we trade Lee or someone else, I don't see Dunn as a option.

I see this as a big problem, because obviously Towers wants a quality front of the rotation prospect or big time power bat prospect. To go long with probably guys like Pie or maybe Vitters, Marshall, Cedeno and so on. What do the Cubs have to offer to get this big time prospect for the Padres? However you try to figure it out some team is going to get screwed. Because we don't have the talent to offer another team to get this prospect for the Padres. IMO if Hendry somehow pulls this off and gets a good prospect for the Padres, he's gonna be a genius. The odds of that happening aren't good. So the only way I see Peavy getting traded to the Cubs is if the Padres hold out and hold out, but then get desperate in late December or January, and trade him for alot less then they wanted to. But who knows if the Cubs would even be able to fit him in their budget by then. Despite Donnie info, my hopes for getting Peavy have decreased a ton in the last 4-5 days.

I wouldn't mind adding Randy Johnson, and honestly think it would be pretty cool to have him. But at his age with a bad back, I don't think we can count on him being our number 3 or 4 starter. Especially with Rich Harden most likely due to miss some starts here and there. I still think Johnson would be looking for contract at 1y around 8 or 9m though.

I still don't understand why you're under the impression that the Padres would want Gregg. He probably has negative value to them Your probably right, but Im just baffled about the Gregg trade otherwise. Greggs not particularly bad, and Im not saying that Cedas is the next K Rod, but he was one of our top trade chips, and we traded him for a guy who we really had little to no use for, with 1 year under team control. It could be that for once Hendry traded a player while his value was the highest, and got a decent return for someone he didn't see fitting into the Cubs plans in the future. He may have traded him while his value was highest, but he didn't get true value for him. He basically gave him away for a mediocre reliever who will make millions next year. It doesn't matter if he doesn't fit into the Cubs plans, he still has value that can be used. I can't stand when people use that argument. I dunno if Ceda value was much higher then a guy like Kevin Gregg, and the only reason the Marlins only got one prospect for a Gregg, Is because Gregg got hurt and struggled in mid to late August. On August 14th, Gregg was 26 of 32 in saves with a 2.29 era, and had a mid 2 era most of the season. The fact that he got bombed from August 15 through 29 and then went on the DL, made him have less value this offseason. I'm not saying that makes it ok for Hendry to trade a prospect like Ceda for Gregg. But a guy like Gregg who doesn't make alot, who can close and has a mid 3's era, has good value around the league. I'm sure alot of people around baseball don't see Gregg as a mediocre reliever, including obviously Jim Hendry. Hendry has made alot of moves in the few years that seemed questionable like this, and most of them worked out ok. So I'm willing to give Hendry the benefit of the doubt and just see what happens before I call it a bad move.

I still don't understand why you're under the impression that the Padres would want Gregg. He probably has negative value to them Your probably right, but Im just baffled about the Gregg trade otherwise. Greggs not particularly bad, and Im not saying that Cedas is the next K Rod, but he was one of our top trade chips, and we traded him for a guy who we really had little to no use for, with 1 year under team control. What are you confused about? The Cubs wanted a late inning reliever, with closer experience, who didn't cost alot, to replace Wood. The Cubs had to cut back somewere and decided to do it in the bullpen, so they can have a better rotation and line-up. Having Gregg for one year is also a bonus, since he will likely give us some draft picks when he leaves, and it also allows time for some of our younger relievers to proven themselves. Gregg will be pitching in the 8th or 9th so we will have use for him. Trading Ceda was risky, but he doesn't have that great of value around the league anyways.

Well the Padres might see Gregg as a guy who could have a good amount of value at the trade deadline. The Marlins probably made a mistake of holding on to him until the offseason. In July and early August Gregg numbers were pretty good, and they probably could have gotten more then Jose Ceda for him. Teams always need late inning relievers, and pitching in Petco would probably only improve his numbers. Even if they didn't find a taker at the deadline, he's most likely to get them some draft picks at the end of the season. That said, I don't think the Cubs are looking to trade him, and will use him in the 8th or 9th inning this year. The Cubs saw Gregg as a cheap one year replacement for Wood, hopefully by next year guys like Guzman, Ascanio and Samardzija(if he's not starting) are ready to take over in the late innings.

With the way Lou is, I just can't imagine him sticking with gregg as the closer as he's walking guys non-stop. I know Marmol walks a lot of guy's too, but he has the K's and the ability to not give up hits to make up for it. I could see Gregg walking 2 guys and then serving up a 3 run bomb in a save opp in ST and Lou saying "that's it, Marmol is closing" You would think that, but he stuck with Dempster as closer in 07. Even though Howry and Marmol were both pretty much lights out in the second half of 07. Gregg control as bad or simliar to Dempster, but he's also tougher to hit. As long as Gregg isn't blowing a bunch of saves Lou will stick with him. In 07 Gregg saved 32 of 36, and last year he was 26 of 32 before getting hurt and losing his closer spot, I'm sure the Marlins defense didn't help either. If he pitches anything like that I think Lou would stick with him as the closer.

He didn't use him poorly...he just overused him Marmol in the closer role almost seems like a waste lou used him poorly ... some of the time if marmol makes 50 appearances or whatever as a closer, that will be misusing him all of the time Yeah Lou used Marmol poorly the first two or two and half months, after that it was usually pretty much what you would expect. In Lou defense, the pen was crappy earlier in the year with Howry sucking and no Samardzija/Gaudin on the roster yet. But there's no excuse for him in a bunch of those games earlier in the year.

Nobody said Marmol will be closing, Hendry said it would be up to Lou to choose between Marmol and Gregg. Most media people think Marmol is ready to be the closer, so their assuming he is the favorite. Last year we went into camp with Wood, Marmol and Howry fighting for the closer job. Wood still won the job, even though Marmol was awesome. I personally think Piniella realizes Marmol is a weapon to use in the middle innings, so I think there's a good chance Gregg ends up being the closer.

I'd rather still be in negations for a good player, then be stubborn and stop the trade talks because it's taking to long to get a deal done. What does it hurt to keep talks going? It's not like Hendry only has to talk to that team, or try to make a deal with just that team. The only negative would be if Hendry is unwilling to do other trades to keep the players for the other potential trade, and Hendry has shown no signs of doing that. But to let your ego get in the way to say take it or leave it, or worry about if their showing you enough respect or not is just silly stuff. Plus from what I have heard Hendry is well liked by many GM's around the league.

Hendry should call Wood out on these comments, since he said he would have done anything to stay with the Cubs. I love Wood and everything, but I'm not buying it. The Cubs should offer him a 1y 3-4m deal, and lets see if he accepts it. It will be interesting to hear Hendry response to these comments. I can't see Wood saying Jim I don't wanna leave, I will come back at the same contract as last year, I just wanna stay and help the Cubs win. Then Hendry goes Kerry, we think it's best for you to go on the market and get the money you deserve. It just doesn't make sense, especially when we heard all offseason that the Cubs were willing to take Wood back at one year. So I'm taking these comments FWIW, because I can easily see Wood changing his story a bit after he realize that trying to stay face with the fans has made Hendry look like a idiot.

Sounds like that could be it, unless the Cubs have concerns about Wood arm holding up again next year.

That doesn't mean Wood's comments were untruthful. What Sullivan is saying is that Hendry would have given him a one year deal but didn't because he felt bad about being able to get more elsewhere. It's obvious that hendry's feelings got in the way and he didn't do what was best for the team and organization. Bad way to run a team. I think Wood was asking for a 3 year deal, and the Cubs made it clear they were willing to do only a one year deal. I'm sure Wood wasn't willing to accept a one year deal since day one or the contract would have been done. In the long run Wood probably would have accepted a one year deal, rather then leave.(I think thats what his comments mean). But Hendry didn't think it was right for Wood to have to take the Cubs low ball offer, when they knew he wanted a 3 year deal and he could get one on the open market. I agree this isn't a good way to run a team, but it's not like Hendry is like this with every player. Hendry and Wood just have a big brother, litle brother type realtionship and are really close. Overall I think his closeness with Wood has helped us more then hurt us. Sadly this time it hurt us, but I never felt it was realistic for Wood to finsh his career with the Cubs.

I think Jim Hendry closeness to Wood might have backfired on us this time around. I think Hendry kinda felt bad about only giving Wood a 1y-5m type of contract, when he could have gotten alot more. But I think part of Wood comments today is Wood trying to stay face with the fans. Now that he won't be back it's easy to say he would have accepted this or that. But during talks with Hendry, I bet they weren't talking about 1 year deals. I do still think the Cubs will offer Wood arbitration, because Wood I'm sure agree not to accept it. This article in the Tribune claims the Cubs were willing to bring Wood back at a one year deal. So Wood comments might not be truthful. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/cubs/chi-14-cubs-kerry-wood-chicagonov14,0,3004592.story

But we also don't know if Ceda will be any good in the future. Much like Cashner and who ever else we could draft in the future. All we know right now is Ceda, can get A and AA hitters out as a reliever in a impressive way. Who knows if his lack of control, and his weight will catch up to him once he gets to the higher levels. Thats why I don't really mind losing Ceda all that much right now. Just because he's one of our best prospects doesn't give him much more value around the league. Alot of teams with better farms can trade guys like Ceda, and have it not affect their farm system much. But the Cubs are in a win now mode, and were looking for a cheap(salary wise)replacment for Wood(reliever who can set-up and has experience closing), so they can have more money improve other parts of the ballclub. If Ceda was a good starting prospect, I would be much more against trading him.

Furcal? Soriano? Roberts? Peavy? I thought that Fukudome was our number one target last offseason though. According to Piniella it doesn't seem like Peavy is our number one target though. But who knows if he was being truthful or not.

The Brewers had a few guys making around 5m as set-up guys. I think the Phillies also paid Tom Gordon around 5m, but he was on the DL. Plus nobody said that Gregg wouldn't end up being the closer next season. As for being a type A, Gregg just has be somewhat decent this year and he will. But after how he pitched the last two years, I don't know why we would suck next year at his age. Besides a two week stretch when Gregg was probably pitching hurt, he was pretty good last year. Riske? Who'd they trade for him? Actually, speaking of the brewers reminded me that the Torres trade is a pretty good comp...Ceda is much more highly thought of than either guy the Bucs got. They didn't trade him for anybody, but they signed him to a 3y, I believe 16m deal. I much rather trade a questionable prospect like Ceda for one year of Gregg at 4-5m, and draft picks next offseason. As long as Hendry doesn't resign Gregg at the end of the year(unless he's much better next year), I don't see how this is such a horrible trade. You use Gregg for a year, and you get draft picks at the end of the year to replace Ceda in your system. Exactly, the point is that its a bad decision to SIGN an average reliever for 5M, its an idiotic decision to trade one of your best prospects for one. People dont get that theres such a ridiculous attrition for non to 10-15 draft picks. If Ceda was in college he wouldnt last past the protected picks, you can bet that. So NO, comp picks do not replace Ceda. I think it's better to trade for a reliever for one year at 5m, then sign one for three years at 15m. I dunno maybe your higher on Ceda then me, but I don't see Ceda as a much better prospect then say Andrew Cashner once he has some success in the minors. You can get plenty of good players after the top 10-15 picks, and the Cubs might actually get a better prospect then Ceda. you say that so flippantly I was just using it as a example of a reliever/starter with good stuff, that we drafted in not the top 10-15 picks. Who knows if Cashner will be as good as Ceda was. But the point I was trying to make is, we have a decent chance of getting a good prospect out of the four picks we get for losing Wood/Gregg.

The Brewers had a few guys making around 5m as set-up guys. I think the Phillies also paid Tom Gordon around 5m, but he was on the DL. Plus nobody said that Gregg wouldn't end up being the closer next season. As for being a type A, Gregg just has be somewhat decent this year and he will. But after how he pitched the last two years, I don't know why we would suck next year at his age. Besides a two week stretch when Gregg was probably pitching hurt, he was pretty good last year. Riske? Who'd they trade for him? Actually, speaking of the brewers reminded me that the Torres trade is a pretty good comp...Ceda is much more highly thought of than either guy the Bucs got. They didn't trade him for anybody, but they signed him to a 3y, I believe 16m deal. I much rather trade a questionable prospect like Ceda for one year of Gregg at 4-5m, and draft picks next offseason. As long as Hendry doesn't resign Gregg at the end of the year(unless he's much better next year), I don't see how this is such a horrible trade. You use Gregg for a year, and you get draft picks at the end of the year to replace Ceda in your system. Exactly, the point is that its a bad decision to SIGN an average reliever for 5M, its an idiotic decision to trade one of your best prospects for one. People dont get that theres such a ridiculous attrition for non to 10-15 draft picks. If Ceda was in college he wouldnt last past the protected picks, you can bet that. So NO, comp picks do not replace Ceda. I think it's better to trade for a reliever for one year at 5m, then sign one for three years at 15m. For example I thought Bob Howry was worth his money the first two years of the deal, but sucking last year turn his contract into a bad one. I dunno maybe your higher on Ceda then me, but I don't see Ceda as a much better prospect then say Andrew Cashner once he has some success in the minors. You can get plenty of good players after the top 10-15 picks, and the Cubs might actually get a better prospect then Ceda. But the whole point of this is to replace Wood, and like mentioned before there wasn't really alot better options. It's not like the Cubs made this trade for the heck of it, they did it to have a proven late inning reliever to pitch with Marmol.

Rotoworld made it sound like Kevin Gregg might have had a little more value then Jose Ceda.

The Brewers had a few guys making around 5m as set-up guys. I think the Phillies also paid Tom Gordon around 5m, but he was on the DL. Plus nobody said that Gregg wouldn't end up being the closer next season. As for being a type A, Gregg just has be somewhat decent this year and he will. But after how he pitched the last two years, I don't know why we would suck next year at his age. Besides a two week stretch when Gregg was probably pitching hurt, he was pretty good last year. Riske? Who'd they trade for him? Actually, speaking of the brewers reminded me that the Torres trade is a pretty good comp...Ceda is much more highly thought of than either guy the Bucs got. They didn't trade him for anybody, but they signed him to a 3y, 13m deal. I much rather trade a questionable prospect like Ceda for one year of Gregg at 4-5m, and draft picks next offseason. As long as Hendry doesn't resign Gregg at the end of the year, I don't see how this is such a horrible trade. You use Gregg for a year, and you get draft picks at the end of the year to replace Ceda in your system.

What are some realistic alternatives that can be had? Perhaps comparing them will be helpful. We're not in contact with other GMs so there is no way we could possibly know who is available. That's kind of a silly thing to ask. Then it is kind of silly to say that there are better alternatives. A) He never said there were better alternatives B) Just because you can't give examples of something doesn't mean it's not true A) He said there are alternatives. He wishes they explored those alternatives. Can one not assume that he is referring to a better alternative then? B) When backing up words and statements, thus making them meaningful, there should be something there to back it up. Otherwise, they are just empty words. It might be what you believe, but it certainly does not make it fact. That is the beauty of stats and baseball. You can find stats to back up your arguments. When someone wants to know who is the best player, you can prove it rather than just saying it. Alternatives: Trading someone other than Ceda for Gregg Signing Affeldt Signing Springer Signing Oliver Signing Cruz Signing Hoffman Signing Farns Signing Lyon Trading for Street Trading for a Rays reliever Trading for Madson umpteen bagillion other serviceable relievers Do you really think it was Gregg or bust? Do you really think they wouldnt have traded for anyone but Ceda? Are you really that uncreative? Affeldt and Oliver are LH specialist, who I actually think this team will still add, but probably a lesser one. Street, Madson and a young reliever with the Rays would cost alot more then Jose Ceda. Juan Cruz could end up getting a Dotel or Linebrink type contract this offseason, and Lyon will probably get a two year deal as well. Russ Springer turned down 2-3 year deals to stay with the Cardinals last offseason. If he leaves St. Louis he will probably want more then a one year deal. Hoffman might have been a realistic option, but he would probably cost more then 4-5m per season. Kyle Farnsworth well I don't need to explain why thats a much worse idea.

If Dempster lasted all of 2007, with Marmol and Howry pitching so well in the second half. I'm confident Kevin Gregg will do just fine in the closer role.

The Brewers had a few guys making around 5m as set-up guys. I think the Phillies also paid Tom Gordon around 5m, but he was on the DL. Plus nobody said that Gregg wouldn't end up being the closer next season. As for being a type A, Gregg just has be somewhat decent this year and he will. But after how he pitched the last two years, I don't know why we would suck next year at his age. Besides a two week stretch when Gregg was probably pitching hurt, he was pretty good last year.