Sever82

I refer back to my comments earlier that the media has overhyped the yankees prospects, especially ESPN. So someone with no knowledge of their prospects might look at the deal and go... wow they're giving up jackson, he's one of the top prospects in baseball. I mean Jackson is a decent prospect but Ian Kennedy is garbage, so is Michael Dunn and Coke. Hopefully the Tigers aren't dumb enough to say yes. The cubs could offer a way better package that this and not include castro in the deal. I wouldn't be opposed to a Vitters, Jay Jack, Fuld and Marshall deal for him. Olney is reporting that the deal seems at a low right now and that only one team seems to be still trying which i assume are the Dbacks.

1) Youth relative to league (19 years old in A+ and AA) 2) Plus defensive tools at a premium position (SS) 3) Plus speed 4) Contact Ability Yeah, the guy could bust, but even before the AFL he was a Top 40 prospect in all of baseball. Considering there have been rumors going around that the Cubs might make him the everyday SS in 2010 with Theriot moving to 2B, he clearly has really good potential to be a special player. Remember how you said those previous top-level prospects with the Cubs panned out with other teams? I'd rather not see that happen with the Cubs and Castro, especially if the Cubs didn't get appropriate value for him. I don't think Granderson for Castro plus other prospects would be a good deal for the Cubs. What i dont get is why so many people keep posting stuff like " Look what happened with the other supposed prospects." I mean Castro could flop but its better for the cubs to develop their own talent than continue to go out and trade people away for others. And I mean what do past prospects have to do with Castro, Vitters, Cashner, etc. I mean yes they're all prospects but people who continued to want to trade them away will be the same people who criticize hendry if those prospects pan out into something special.

I agree Castro's numbers aren't eye popping but i think they're pretty good considering his age. But i think what makes Castro is what scouts have observed about him. Whether its his speed, his bat speed, his eye at the plate, his contact ability, etc. In the past, the cubs have overhyped their prospects, not the scouts. Scouts did rave about Patterson but not about Pie, Cedeno, etc. The last i heard scouts rave about a cubs prospect like this was Patterson and Wood.

Penny is not a number 3 starter. He's a end of the rotation type of pitcher. He turned it up in September for the Giants but was horrible in July and August. This isn't the 07' Brad Penny.

This is 100% correct, except for the part where you say the Cubs were cautious with Patterson. I dont know, i mean i think they were. I think the cubs baby their prospects too much. With Pie, they didnt let him work through his slumps, as soon as he slumped they put him on the bench and then to Iowa. If you believe a prospect is going to be good, let him struggle and work his way out of it. How is that babying? That's called screwing them up. The Cubs were not cautious with Patterson. Here's what happened with Corey. He was drafted and specifically called a future middle of the order hitter and not a leadoff hitter. He had immediate success in low A, then skipped high A and went to AA and was called up 2 years after graduating high school. The manager immediately went to work criticizing his power stroke and trying to turn him into a slappy McGee leadoff hitter. He struggled. They then talked about the need to not yo-yo the kid and give him time to develop. So, he starts next year in AAA, struggles, gets called up anyway, barely plays. He's 21 years old, he's been developed as a power hitter and then told to start bunting, and on top of it all, his biggest fault, over aggressiveness and a lack of patience/walks, is exacerbated by a coaching staff and front office that abhors patience at the plate. He's not playing much and doesn't have an incredible amount of pro time on his belt, but at 22 he's given the full time job, where he struggles. He begins to improve, then gets injured, and that was the beginning of the end. The Cubs do not baby prospects. That accusation makes no sense. If the Cubs babied Patterson he would have spent 1999 in short season ball, 2000 in low A, 2001 in high A and 2002 in AA before being called up ta 22 at the earliest. What happened to Pie? I also wrote that they didnt baby Patterson. What i mean by babying is that they put most of their prospects on a short leash and at the intiial sign that they struggle they overreact and either send them down for more development or bench them.

Ed Price just Twittered: #Tigers and #Yankees are in talks on Granderson, but "lukewarm" cause Yanks so far won'tdeal prospect A.Jackson & Det wants CF in return. Looks like they want a good amoutn for Granderson. I think if the Cubs want Granderson but dont want to deal Castro, they'll have to deal Cashner and Vitters in a package for him.

http://blog.mlive.com/cutoffman/2009/12/report_tigers_close_to_dealing.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+detroit-tigers+%28Detroit+Tigers+Impact+-+MLive.com%29 Report: Tigers close to dealing Edwin Jackson, Curtis Granderson to New York Yankees By James Schmehl | MLive.com December 07, 2009, 3:07PM AP PhotoThe New York Yankees are reportedly close to a trade involving Tigers outfielder Curtis Granderson and pitcher Edwin Jackson.The rumor mill is filling up fast -- and it's only the first day of the annual four-day winter meetings. The Chicago Tribune's Dave van [expletive] is reporting the Tigers are closing in on a deal that would send Edwin Jackson and outfielder Curtis Granderson to the New York Yankees. The Cubs reportedly remain heavily interested in Granderson, but van [expletive] said Chicago "may not have the ability to take both players" unless they can find a suitor for Cubs outfielder Milton Bradley. Chicago Tribune, Dec. 7: The Yankees apparently are trying to put together a package of young players. One executive said the Cubs might have a more attractive offer and that manager Lou Piniella loves Granderson, a Chicago native. Both teams also are interested in Mike Cameron if they lose out on Granderson, although it is not a lock the Tigers will be dealing him. The Yankees also have the ability to take on starter Edwin Jackson, and a report in USA Today had Jackson being close to leaving the Tigers in a trade. AOL FanHouse's Ed Price reported earlier that the New York Mets were rumored to have acquired Tigers pitcher Edwin Jackson. However, News Day's Ken Davidoff said a Mets official has since denied the rumor. That be the case, Jackson still appears to be available on the trade market, but as USA Today's Bob Nightengale notes, he could be traded as early as today. Despite the Tribune's report, Fox Sports said a team in the National League is most likely to land Jackson. The Arizona Diamondbacks and Seattle Mariners are reportedly "known to have interest." The report also said the Brewers, Mets and Dodgers are not interested in Jackson. That be the case, an earlier report suggesting a trade involving Jackson and Dodgers reliever George Sherrill can be dismissed. Not sure how this article assumes the yankees are closing in on a deal from what the articles he posted say?

Someone on the Cubs board on ESPN posted that the Yankees acquire Granderson for Hughes and Jackson. I'm guessing thats false.

Hopefully they dont comeback and say Castro and one prospect and the cubs say "ok"

I hope all in means all in except for Castro.

This is 100% correct, except for the part where you say the Cubs were cautious with Patterson. I dont know, i mean i think they were. I think the cubs baby their prospects too much. With Pie, they didnt let him work through his slumps, as soon as he slumped they put him on the bench and then to Iowa. If you believe a prospect is going to be good, let him struggle and work his way out of it. I can't find one highly touted prospect that became a star right out of the gates. Longoria did well out of the gate and so did beckham. But then you have players like Hanley or Miguel Cabrera that struggled a bit initially and then later worked their way through it. I think the problem with the cubs organization is that they expect these young players to be studs and put the same numbers they put in the minors right out the gate.

They need to play their absolute best option next year, regardless of service time. '11 looks rough. Very True, the cubs were cautoius with Patterson, Pie, etc and no of those players develop. I'm all for bringing Castro up, as long as Piniella has enough patience with him and doesn't have a short leash on him.

The offense would have to be good enough to put Blanco in at SS, I think. Unless you want to rush Castro, and I'd prefer not to. If the cubs acquire Granderson by letting go of Marmol and Theriot, i'm all for it, even if it rushes Castro because i think Castro would still develop with the big league club under Jaramillo. The key would be not hurting his confidence. If he comes up and puts up a .220/.230/.385 line this year, how does he handle that? I don't know, but I'd prefer to take it slowly with a promising player as young as he is. I think he'll handle it just fine. He's only 19 yrs old and reading some of the spanish articles and english articles on him, he seems to have a lot of self confidence. If he was a player that was passive and kept referring back to the organization when asked about his developed then i would agree with you but from all the quotes i read, he expects to be in the big leagues this year and is confident in his skills.

If this is the case, I imagine that we can bury the Luis Castillo rumors, unless they plan on using Fontneot as trade bait. With Theriot, Baker, Font, and Blanco, I cant imagine adding another middle infielder. From what i've read they were going to offer Fontenot a contract regardless, so i would imagine he might stay or go if the right trade presents itself.

The offense would have to be good enough to put Blanco in at SS, I think. Unless you want to rush Castro, and I'd prefer not to. If the cubs acquire Granderson by letting go of Marmol and Theriot, i'm all for it, even if it rushes Castro because i think Castro would still develop with the big league club under Jaramillo.

Just curious but there is a report on ChicagoSports.com that the cubs are interested in Heath Bell from the padres and that the padres would be interested in Theriot or Soto. Would anybody here be opposed to trading Theriot to the Padres for Bell and then centering a deal to the Tigers for Granderson that revolves around Marmol?

Yankees could thwart Cubs' shot at Granderson December 7, 2009 1:28 PM | No Comments By Dave van Dyck INDIANAPOLIS -- Latest hot winter-meetings rumor making the rounds in the Marriott Hotel lobby is that the Yankees are hot on the trail of Tigers center fielder Curtis Granderson, and that is not good news for the Cubs. While the Cubs seem stuck, money-wise, until Milton Bradley departs, the Yankees apparently are trying to put together a package of young players. One executive said the Cubs might have a more attractive offer and that manager Lou Piniella loves Granderson, a Chicago native. Both teams also are interested in Mike Cameron if they lose out on Granderson, although it is not a lock the Tigers will be dealing him. The Yankees also have the ability to take on starter Edwin Jackson, and a report in USA Today had Jackson being close to leaving the Tigers in a trade. The Cubs may not have the ability to take both players.

Gordon Whittmeyer just shot down the report of cubs meeting with Royals from Levine.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/12/edwin-jackson-rumors-monday.html Edwin Jackson Rumors: Monday By Tim Dierkes [December 7, 2009 at 12:57pm CST] USA Today's Bob Nightengale tweets that the Tigers are close to trading Edwin Jackson, "perhaps as early as today." No word on the potential destination, but we'll keep you apprised in this post. What's more, Nightengale says the Tigers hope to trade Curtis Granderson this week. The Tigers acquired Jackson from the Rays during the Winter Meetings last year, on December 10th. PLease Hendry get Granderson and Jackson in some type of miracle three way deal that rids us of Bradley, please :D

I know the Braves are looking to add a bat and trade either Lowe or Vazquez to get one. Any chance the Braves and Bobby Cox think they can handle Milton? I know it would require the Cubs to throw more than just Bradley Braves way. I think Bobby Cox already said he doesn't want to deal with Bradley. I would say the Dodgers might be an option with Pierre, maybe a three way deal somehow that lands the Dodgers a pitcher and the cubs something of use. Not sure if they'd want Pierre.

I dont know about all that. Aramis was coming off a horrible season the year before and the pirates weren't high on him. Dlee was more of a salary dump by the Marlins and they saw Choi as a good prospect to replace Lee. Patterson i do agree with you that we could've gotten good value for him when he was a prospect. As for Pie, again I doubt it because he wasn't exactly tearing it up and the cubs did explore trades for him and other prospects at the time but nothing popped up worthwhile. I dont think you can name one player we could've gotten for Pie that was worth doing. You make it seem as if the Cubs top Prospects in those years were of great discussion in trades as the Yankee and Red sox prospects are nowadays.

True but they still market him as a starter, along with Chamberlain whom both have not had success as starters. If Samardijza was a Yankee after his first season, he would've been on the cover of SI or would have been talked about alot when trades came around. Same thing can be said about Angel Guzman, I guarantee you he would be talked about a centerpiece for a trade if he were with either club.

Same thing can be said about the Red Sox. I mean i dont think Bucholz is anything special and he hasn't showed to be but yet the Media acts as if a Buckholz + two prospects for Halladay is more than enough to get that deal done. Then you have Jed Lowrie who was supposed to be their shortstop of the future. I like Ellsbury but because of the media and ESPN's Olney, Gammons, etc. I think every other team thats not the Red Sox or Yankees is going to have a tough time trading against those two because of their overhypes prospects.

What deals have Hendry and Cashman done in the past? Keep in mind that Hendry is generally very good at trades. I would not be in favor of acquiring Melky, though. Stick with Cameron. I know Brian Cashman and the Yankees dont give up guys for nothing. And Hendry very rarely gets taken in trades. He's backed out of deals for plenty of players he's wanted because the opposing GM was asking for an arm and a leg (or more). Melky is vastly overrated, along with all the other supposed young studs the yankees have in Hughes, Chamberlain, Cabrera, etc. The media blows them up but none of those guys has had a decent season other than Chamberlain.

from mlbtraderumors.com Definitely couldn't complain about that. The royals are going to ask for more than just bradley, they'll probably ask for a pitcher or two. How would you guys feel if they asked for Marshall on top of bradley. Depends on how much money changes hands. Meche's shoulder injury makes me leery. To be honest, i can care less if they trade Bradley. I only want them to trade Bradley because Hendry seems to keep putting it out there that they won't do anything else until they trade him. I have a feeling that Bradley will have a good season next year.