Jake Peavy Rumors: Wednesday

I really want to think that the Cubs will get Peavy, but I just dont know. They do need to get a OF that is a lefty first. I think it is a 75% that he will be traded to the Cubs.

I wonder if Peavy pushes SD to trade him would they accept a smaller package from the Cubs and/or the third team?

Giles would need to waive his no trade clause

For sure, and Giles would be the best option for the cubs, Bradley hasnt play OF in a couple years and Abreu may cost to much. It would make the cubs lineup complete.

my dream deal would be to send Peavy and Giles to the cubs. O think it would look something like this:

Pads send: Giles and Peavy
Pads get: Olsen, Hart, Vitters,Guzman Jaramillo, Carassco, and eat Marquis salary

Cubs send: DeRosa,Marquis, Vitters, Guzman, Hart, Pie
Cubs get: Peavy and Giles

Phillies send: Jaramillo and Carrasco
Phillies get: DeRosa

O's send: Olsen
O's get: Pie

Now that deal seems reasonable to me, with the cubs and Pads getting a slight nod on the outcome

Unfortunately I have to agree with you there northsider, but i does hurt to dream

Though I feel that the Phillies would love DeRosa and would be trading from positions which they have several players who could replace those they lost. I guess it will come down to whether or not they think DeRosa fits their need

I don't understand how Vitters is involved, period. When this whole ordeal started, towers stated that his goal was to get a 5-1 trade for Peavy. Pitching was the priority.

Now we are hearing that the propsed deal is likely to include 2 pitching prospects from Philly (via Paul Sullivan). That makes sense, he wanted pitching. There are also rumors that marshall is off the table and Marquis is on, although the cubs have to take on half to a bit over half of his salary. I'm fine with that, plus it gives the Pads more pitching.

Hart is always tied in too, so that makes 4 prospects. that leaves 1 prospect to come in to make it the minimum 5-1 deal. Towers gets 3 pitchers. The only point of the cubs having to get "creative" was to get SD pitching. Creative was basically a synonym for trading Vitters elsewhere for pitching to send OR sending Vitters to SD in lieu of sending pitching over there. One of those replaceable parts to spin off, if you will.

Well, the padres have their pitching prospects and a pitcher supposedly. They also get Kevin Hart, who apparently is a man crush of Towers. That leaves one prospect spot, which i would imagine being Pie/Cedeno/Atkins. If they really are interested in Jaramillo, perhaps the 5th prospect should be Wellington Castillo.

Basically, I think taht is a very adequate package for the Pads and doesn't require Vitters to be used anywhere in it. I'm calling Towers' bluff. If Peavy is traded, and those packages hold true, the fifth player shouldn't be Vitters.

Bradley played 120 games last year, before that most in his career is 140!!!
You cant give a guy 8-10 million a year to play a little over half your games, and thats all you can expect from him. When hes healthy hes gotten on-base and hit for some power, but overall hes not been reliable. I dont want to see the cubs add him and come june be looking for someone to fill in while hes hurt. Get ibanez for the same 3 years most likely and know hes going to hit and most importantly PLAY. Plus theres no concern of him hurting the clubhouse.

Also, just go get peavy. I wonder if Hoffpauir and Fontenot could be going to Phili? Fills in 2nd temporarily and gives them a LF option for a platoon maybe. Plus both are very cheap and they can put that money towards Moyer. Im not really sure what other players they could get, they wouldnt want Kosuke's contract, so it seems like Fontenot is the most likey to go. Maybe bullpen help as well for insurance. I think this deal gets done before thurs.

Chicubs25-

No way it gets done before Thursday. it is pretty much logistically impossible. Rule 5 draft is on thursday and the padres have 37 on the 40 man. Pulling a 5-1 trade would put them at 41... meaning they couldnt draft anyone OR it would leave some prospects (or chips from this trade) open to being Rule 5'd.

That does seem like a lot for one year or Mark DeRosa

Very true, you right. What i meant was a deal would be agreed to. I should have been more clear.

I also think that Towers could be way more creative here. Giles for Marquis is almost a wash salarywise and that would answer the cubs need and allow them to continue with forming the rest of the deal

I seriously doubt that Hendry is going to give up DeRosa, that could be why he hasnt pulled the trigger on this yet, he is trying to find other players. Lou likes DeRosa way to much and he loves his versatility. But who knows if Lou knows whats going on with any of this.

For phils fans: the benefit outside of his versitility is the fact that you will get 2 draft picks out of him too when he walks.

I don't think Vitters is needed to add to the "quality" part (though good job on using Towers' statements). The first four out of the five I listed would be quality... and adding in Wellington Castillo or Felix Pie keeps that trend alive.

Towers really isn't in much of a drivers seat to call who he does and does not want. His only real ally is how he has been using the media so far... his attempts at "transparency" are really bad ploys to pressure the cubs into doing something dumb like give up Vitters.

Quite frankly, Peavy through Axelrod said the Peavy train has left the station and isnt coming back. All the talks of opening day are hollow. Moreso, Axelrod is getting fed up with Towers' games and the delays that keep happening (IIRC, when asked about whether peavy would require the option year to be picked up in order for the trade to go through, Axelrod said something along the lines of not wanting to hold this thing up any more than it has to)

I put my money on the cubs getting this done without Vitters. You either get concentrated quality or talent that is spread out in quantity. Towers wanted to go the route of 5 players, so he will get the talent spread out more. Understandably you may disagree... but that is how I see it right now playing out.

"I put my money on the cubs getting this done without Vitters."

If the Cubs could include a SP prospect ranked as high as Vitters, I'd say you're right, as 3B isn't a priority for SD.

However, I don't think there's any way we trade Peavy with getting back at least one top prospect, and Vitters is basically the only guy fitting that bill with the Cubs farm today.

IMHO, I'd be very surprised if he isn't in the package.

It would be good to get a firm idea of the players Philly would be sending.

Also, in order to get those quality arms, the Cubs would have to send Philly something pretty compelling. I thought the Phillies were high on DeRosa, but the above rumor seems to shoot that down. I'd be curious to see which other Cubs would be interesting for Philly.

I was also reading your previous posts, and you mention Marquis and Cedeno. I don't think either is interesting for Towers. He's said publicly that he doesn't think Cedeno is an appropriate replacement for Greene, and I fail to understand why he'd want Marquis, even if the Cubs chip in for his salary. SD already has several back-end candidates in their farm. What can Marquis bring to the table that other guys like Clay Hensley can't?

"why exactly again would Philly trade one or two of our top pitching prospects including one ranked by MLB.com as the 28th best prospect in all of baseball (Carrasco) and not even get back Derosa (who i wouldn't trade either Drabek or Carrasco for anyway?). And why would philly do that for the Cubs who have been in the playoffs with us for the past two years and possibly this year?? Exactly what motiviation does Philly have to be that stupid?

I'd say its more likely Kendrick (or Happ) and Jaramillo. I'd prefer Kendrick and Jaramillo but could live with Happ IF we got DeRosa.

And don't give me this crap of Utley's hurt so you need him. We have Donald and Bruntlett who will do fine while Utley rehabs."

Well as an outside SD fan looking at this objectively, a lot of what you say makes sense. The Phillies wouldn't give good prospecrs away uless the return was worth it.

The only thing I disagree with is DeRosa's value to Philly. He'd be a significant upgrade over Donald and Bruntlett. he'd be a nice addition, and one the Phillies may slightly overpay for if they feel that 2B is a hole until Utley is back.

Jamarillo has value, but Kendrick is less appealing to SD. My guess is that the Cubs will have to part with DeRosa or another valuable chip in order to flip a top SP prospect to SD.

Remember: Philly is in "win now" mode, so they may be willing to trade prospects, even good ones, if they feel they can add that last piece to make another run at the WS.

Stark and Rosenthal's consistent rumor that the Cubs would not be able to complete a deal until a new owner is announced is completely ridiculous. If that was the case, Hendry wouldn't even bother. It's not like buying a candy bar. The sale, even after it's announced, will take months to complete. The new owner won't have a bearing on this offseason's moves.

"Now that deal seems reasonable to me, with the cubs and Pads getting a slight nod on the outcome"

A SLIGHT nod? Not a chance in HELL the Phils include Carrasco in that deal. Let's have some common sense.....please.

If the Cubs do land Peavy I wouldn't mind Hendry exploring the possibility of trading Zambrano. With CC off the market now, I would think we could land the lefty bat and maybe the leadoff hitter we need. Anaheim or the Dodgers or the Red Sox or any other team in need of pitching.

The Peavy thing will carry on forever, it appears, similar to the Johan saga last off-season.

I just want this to get done, so everyone can move on with thier lives.

"It makes perfect sense if you think about it from a legal standpoint, that they are bidding on the team with those budget terms on paper already."

Not sure it makes sense from a LEGAL standpoint but it definitely makes perfect sense from a financial standpoint.

dberry,

Just because Happ happens to be the 5th ranked prospect in a mediocre Phils system doesn't make him a top prospect. Sickels only gave him a B- grade, which means he isn't even that close to being a top 100 prospect. To put that grade into perspective, the Braves have 7 guys who were graded higher and 13 guys who got at least a B-. Drabek isn't even close to being a top prospect at this point. Sickels only ranks him as a C+, which means he's not all that impressive. Again, for perspective, the Braves have 25 prospects that Sickels ranks as C+ or better.

Its pretty clear that the offer you are proposing contains exactly 0 top 100 prospects. I really can't imagine the Padres considering a Peavy deal without even getting a single top 100 prospect. If the Cubs somehow pull this off without having to give up Vitters, the Padres should probably go ahead and fire Towers on the spot for how he bungled these negotiations.

"Isn't the Cubs sale and Marquis contract issue essentially the same problem?"

Not really. There is a budget that has been agreed to by all parties involved. I assume that once the new owner is chosen they could increase or decrease payroll if they so chose. But right now the budget is set and it is rumored to be around $145 million. So just like every other team, Hendry needs to work his roster around it. Meaning if they want to trade for Peavy AND sign a rightfielder he will need to unload a contract or two. If he just wants to trade for Peavy OR sign a rightfielder then he doesn't need to unload any contracts.

nixa,

you really didn't expect me to just let the slap at Drabek go did you :-)

Ok, yes he hasn't proven anything as of yet because of his TJ surgery, but what he has done in his small subset is pretty good. He was a number one pick and if not for "issues" he would have gone higher than he did. He also has his velocity back from all reports and had a K per inning in Hawaii Winter ball. To me, you don't trade what you don't know yet if he has that much potential. If he was traded and he ends up being an ace Ruben will absolutely be killed for it for a move that makes absolutely no sense for the Phils.

Hamels was awesome in the minor leagues with a ridiculous K rate, Drabek has been the exact opposite. I wouldn't compare the two.

I call B.S. on the notion that Jaramillo has any value to anyone. He's a 25-year-old catcher who slugged a robust .371 on his second go-round at AAA. God knows what that would translate to in Petco.

Nothing like kicking off the mornings with a double dose of Jake Peavy rumors. lol

Teetz1,

agreed Hamels was awesome (similar to Bumgarner I'd assume) but I wouldn't say Drabek has been horrible, he hasn't been given the chance due to injury. I do believe he needs to step up and have a solid season in High A and a forced call up to Reading would be good for his projection, but I'm against trading a kid with this much potential just yet. If he struggles in A ball then maybe he needs a change of scenery.

I also wasn't comparing the two's minor league careers, just that they both were downgraded in the draft due to makeup and injury issues and both continued early in their minor league careers (although Kyle's TJ surgery was much worse than Cole's back issues) Again I'm not ready to give him up for a crap trade like this that doesn't help the ML team at all. in fact the only one helped here is the Cubs.

Dear God,

If you're listening, please make this 3 way deal happen so Kyle Kendrick never gets to throw another pitch in a Philadelphia Phillies uniform.

Your humble servant,

Charlie Manuel

"The Cubs increased payroll several offseasons ago when they signed Soriano, Marquis, DeRosa, Lilly, then went on to extend Ramirez and Zambrano. All the deals were backloaded with the assumption that the team would be sold by the time the deals kicked in. Unfortunately, the sale has taken longer than expected, so the Cubs now need to consider how much payroll new ownership would be willing to take."

It is well documented that they are raising payroll, even more... it is going to be close to 140

The new owners were given books that already assumed Peavy's salary on the 2009 books, so the new owners all knew about the possiblity and have all signed off on the possibility.

The fact of the matter is, with or without moving anyone, the Cubs have 140-145MM to work with. They currently are at 130-133MM after pay increases.

They have around 7-15MM (spread depends on arb hearings and where the final budget falls) to work with as it is, so that means Peavy can be added without an issue regardless. The more we are able to move off our books, the more we have available for a right fielder.

Best case, they already have 15MM to work with. If they sign Peavy, that leaves 4MM. If they have someone eat 5M of Marquis, that puts them right back at 9MM, and gives them some flexibility to sign a right fielder. This is why moving Marquis is such a priority in this trade. The Cubs can't afford (literally) to sign Peavy and realize they can't move Marquis.

Studio, pretty sure that was sarcasm you quoted.

Maybe the Twins could work as a potential 3rd team given the number of pitching prospects they have in the system?

somebody let me off this ride, my head is spinning! Not the twins too!

Is Hendry bungling this almost as much as Towers is?

Deolis Guerra
Shooter Hunt
Tyler Robertson
Anthony Swarzak
Nick Blackburn
Kevin Slowey
Glen Perkins

these are some names that could be on that list. I dont know much about the Twins system. Just thought I would throw that out there.

Lol. This is hilarious. How many d**** teams need to get involved to trade one pitcher. Towers is an idiot and the Cubs need to realize that you can't buy a WS. They lost in the playoffs last year and they will do the same this year.

Deolis Guerra
Shooter Hunt
Tyler Robertson
Anthony Swarzak
Nick Blackburn
Kevin Slowey
Glen Perkins

these are some names that could be on that list.

---

The odds of the Twins being willing to part with any of those guys and especially a few of those guys, is pretty minimal, except maybe Perk, Robertson, and Swarzak.

I find it so amusing that the people that claim to know so much about the Cubs' so-called "ownership constraints" aren't even Cubs fans. One would think that the Cubs fans, the ones that spend their days patrolling for every morsel of Cubs information, would actually know the facts of the organization and sale of such...and not the bitter fans of other teams that are way too involved with the happenings of the Chicago Cubs.

Gov. Blagojevich will fix this.

Good old corrupted Chi-Town will be fine either eay. Trade D-Rose and get the deal done. Then see if Soriano will pack up his bags and ship him the hell out. Sign Abreu and take a hit..peace

tomfromsd- i think Towers is a good GM, but the Padres really haven't improved lately. He seems to be getting better value from a top-notch pitcher like Peavy, but we have to wait to see the bottom line before evaluating GMs.

Jen526- What you said.

I was going to add another prospect to the Twins but didnt know what they wanted. So I suppose you could add maybe Wuertz?

If Hendry can pull off this trade without giving up Marshall or Vitters, he should get the GM of the year award right now.

It seems like Hendry has more leverage right now - Towers really needs to move Peavy and the Cubs are the only place he's willing to go. So, this will ultimately come down to a game of chicken and see who flinches first to get the deal done and Towers has a lot more to lose than Hendry in this one.

Fenton,

I think you under estimate d-Ros. Utley and D-Ros is huge for you guys.... That is a huge upgrade just for a PROSPECT or two. Do you want to win again? You won't be so lucky this year guy. Especially with the players you are losing...

Deeco,

You're right.. it must be the fact that the owners need to approve it that is holding it up. It couldn't possibly be the fact that we are looking at a 3 or 4 team trade with multiple teams losing major league talent/top prospects.

Yep... it's the owners, even though dozens of reports state the potential owners have already been made aware of Peavy's salary and were given books with his salary already prepared for.

Gotta be this ownership situation... can we PLEASE stop saying potential ownership has anything to do with this Peavy trade?? It doesnt... they know about it, it was already adjusted for, it's a moot point. Any hold up is from the teams, NOT the owners.

It's foolish to say (now) that the deal is being held up because of the ownership issues. We know they have to wait for the Rule 5 draft to be completed. This deal could be done already. If it stretches on way past the Rule 5 draft, then maybe the ownership issue can be raised again.