Vazquez to Atlanta and impact on the Cubs

by elgato on Dec 3, 2008 10:23 AM CST Comment 80 comments

Apologies if this has been discussed in other threads, but I think the news that Atlanta has pulled a trade for Javy Vazquez, http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3740201, could have an impact on the Cubs.

I've been in the camp that Peavy probably won't end up a Cub -- especially after re-signing Dempster. Essentially, I didn't think the Cubs would spend a bunch of money (Peavy is owed around $60 million) plus a lot of young talent to get Peavy, when the rotation is already pretty deep and expensive.

But now that Atlanta has already traded some prime talent to get Vazquez, I wonder if San Diego will think Atlanta is out of the Peavy sweepstakes, increase efforts with the Cubs, and work harder to find a third team to swing the deal.

Frankly, I only see Peavy in blue pinstripes next year if someone currently in the Cubs' rotation (Marquis? Harden?) can be dealt to clear payroll. And I'm not advocating a deal for Peavy unless the price is *extremely* right.

But I think the above scenario is more likely now -- maybe 10 percent instead of 1 percent -- thanks to the Vazquez deal. At the same time, I know a lot of us are really tired of hearing/reading about Peavy AND I guess it's possible that Atlanta could be after two starters (I think I remember reading that), though I wonder if they could afford Peavy and Vazquez.

Anyway, I figured I'd get the discussion going ..

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

0 recs | Comment 80 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The biggest point to consider...

is the fact that Atlanta wouldn’t trade Flowers for Peavy but traded him for Javy….interesting.

What to do, with Larry Hughe?

by Rudey on Dec 3, 2008 10:33 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

Because San Diego wanted more

Flowers is a good prospect but not in the class of Hayward, Schaefer, Hanson or even Reyes. I think San Diego wanted at least one of those guys.

The other impact for the Cubs is that people can forget about Escobar being available.

by rlpete on Dec 3, 2008 11:12 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Right.

Hanson was the sticking point, and having seen Hanson pitch in the AFL, I can see why. He might be major league ready in 2009.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Dec 3, 2008 12:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think the Dads wanted Flowers.

They want young pitching, not a guy who projects as a DH. They wanted Hanson and Escobar. The Sox got Lillibridge, who has been passed by in the Braves’ system by Diory Hernandez and would have been passed this year by Brandon Hicks.

"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007

by DeRoMyHero on Dec 3, 2008 12:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I've found...

that you can’t go wrong with a good necktie. Moms on the other hand, they do like flowers.

by CubFan81 on Dec 3, 2008 1:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The Dads might want some power-tools as well.

Brian McRae's 5 o'clock shadow

by PurpleLineToWrigley on Dec 3, 2008 2:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Well,

candlesticks always make a nice present. You could check around and see where she’s registered, you know. OK, now let’s play ball.

Tommie Agee was out.
"This field, this game, is a part of our past. It reminds us of all that was once good, and it could be good again." TM

by Weeghman Park on Dec 3, 2008 10:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Question:

If a power pitcher is a real pain in the ass, does that make him a “power tool”?

I’ll hang up and listen your responses.

Yes, yes ... winter is indeed a pond upon which all of us must skate, braving frostbite and runny noses in the hopes that our cars will start and we shan't embarass ourselves slipping on a patch of black ice. Spring is more a quagmire of cold mud and slush, and fall is a pile of fallen leaves that may or may not hide a pile of doggy doo-doo. But summer, ah summer is an oasis of endless green that disappears all too quickly beneath our feet as we rush through its warm, glorious bliss.

by dat cubfan daver on Dec 4, 2008 10:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

And if Micah Hoffpauir is a PITA...

… does that make him a “Pauir Tool”?

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Dec 4, 2008 11:16 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs

GROAN....

Shameless self promotion!

by znohitter on Dec 4, 2008 11:20 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The Peavy deal should be a no-go...

if the Cubs have to get rid of Rich Harden.

Sure, Peavy and Harden might not be totally the same but I can’t see anything positive out of the Cubs subtracting Harden and all the prospects its going to take to acquire Peavy.

In my opinion, we either find a way to cut Marquis loose with this trade or in some way or we just stay put.

by EJThunder on Dec 3, 2008 11:28 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

I disagree...

I would like to see Harden go in a deal for Peavy. Harden has dominant stuff, but he is just a five inning pitcher. His pitch counts are ridiculously high and he doesn’t pitch so much as he just throws. While I would love to see him pull it together and become a dominant ace, I am not convinced it will happen.

In the middle of a good time, Truth gave me her icy kiss. Look around, you must be joking. All that way, all that way for this? -Oysterband

by Ross on Dec 3, 2008 12:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I could agree with that

Depending on who else the Cubs would have to give up.

by elgato on Dec 3, 2008 12:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think the Padres would take Harden.

They want to cut payroll now. Granted, Harden is only under contract for one year, but I think SD wants prospects only (or minimum salary major leaguers) in this deal.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Dec 3, 2008 1:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

But if you kept him here

Harden becomes your 5th starter in a rotation of Peavy, Z, Dempster, Lily and Harden.

I wouldn’t hesitate to call that the best rotation in baseball since the 90’s Braves.

Harden doesn’t go deep, but what you get is flat out dominance. The fact is that his return value (what you’d get back in a trade) isn’t very high given the injury risk, so you’re better off keeping him at the bargain basement $6M he’s owed next year and seeing what you get.

Besides – under what circumstances would he go in a deal for Peavy? The Padres won’t be competing next year so he does them no good at all, and the rumored 3rd team of the Orioles can’t use him either. I just don’t see how Harden fits into this discussion as a piece.

by Wreckard on Dec 3, 2008 1:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think that the Cubs can afford Harden as a fifth starter.

If the rotation is:
Z
Peavy
Lilly
Demp
#5

the fifth guy has to be someone like Marshall. Both Marquis and Harden would be too expensive. The alternative to trading Harden (or Lilly) is to trade DeRo.

Harden might not be part of the Peavy deal per se, but he will likely be a casualty nonetheless.

"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007

by DeRoMyHero on Dec 3, 2008 2:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Do you think the Cubs could afford Harden as #5

if they tabbed a Hermida/Teahen/Kubel for the LH bat and stuck with Theriot at SS?

The author of this post is not a certified scout, doctor, agent, statistician, manager, or journalist, nor was he ever a very good player, though he tried very hard to be like Ryne Sandberg and was about as scrappy as it gets (in T-ball). Any opinion expressed above should in no way be confused with fact, truth, or reality and is hereby qualified in the following ways: 1) The author does not know as much about baseball as Lou Piniella. 2) The author does not know as much about baseball as Jim Hendry. 3) The author does not know as much about baseball as either Dusty or Darren Baker.

by DGU on Dec 3, 2008 2:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Based on my very unofficial spreadsheet

If the Cubs traded for Peavy and were able to dump 100% of Jason Marquis’ contract, they would be at approximately $137M (including arb raises for Gregg, et al). So…

If the payroll for next year is $140M, yes they could afford Kubel and Harden.

If the real figure is closer to $130M, they would have to trade Harden and/or DeRo just to get down to their payroll figure. They won’t be able to afford any LHB other than someone off the non-tender pile. Or, God forbid, Felix Pie…

"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007

by DeRoMyHero on Dec 3, 2008 2:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I just don't see that

There are easier ways to come up with $6M of extra payroll, ways that don’t hurt you nearly as much.

I would see them moving Derosa before Harden. The marginal loss would be smaller (given that he would yield a higher return, and his replacement is closer in value).

by Wreckard on Dec 3, 2008 3:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd consider Z #5 in that scenario if Harden stays....

Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! --Homer J. Simpson

by Shanghai Badger on Dec 3, 2008 9:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You'd put Z beneath both Lilly and Dempster?

I know Carlos is a bit, uh, inconsistent at times, but that’s a bit harsh, don’tcha think?

by dat cubfan daver on Dec 4, 2008 10:58 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

If we must continue the Peavy talks....

….I will add a tidbit from the Sun Times.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20081202/news_1s2padres.html

Sorry I don’t know how to do the quotes box. However the article references Atlanta’s standing rule to not give players full no trade clauses, which makes it even more unlikely that Peavy will end up a Brave. And we all know he’s not going to end up a Cub, so it’ll be interesting to see where he ends up. In my opinion he’s going somewhere before next season, it’s just a matter of time.

"Pounding sand since 1982...."

by cubswynn on Dec 3, 2008 11:50 AM CST reply actions 0 recs

It's still possible...

… that Peavy could START the season with SD and be traded around the trading deadline, when a more desperate team might be willing to give up more in terms of players than they are now.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Dec 3, 2008 12:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Sure it's possible

I don’t think likely though. If I’m not mistaken, Peavy will make $11 million next year. I doubt the Padres want to spend around $5 million on a pitcher that won’t make much of a difference in their ’09 building season.

"Pounding sand since 1982...."

by cubswynn on Dec 3, 2008 12:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

It's hard to imagine....

I mean really hard. By that time, they’ll be on the hook for 70% of his salary for 2009 already — roughly 8 million. And heaven forbid that Jake gets persnickety about his destinations, which would leave them either on the hook for the nut, or potentially settling for a extremely sub-par offering.

If he’s on their roster on Opening Day, he’ll be there for the year. And I really don’t think he’ll even make it to New Years as a Padre.

by Damen Jackson on Dec 3, 2008 1:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Peavy's already persnickety about destination;

the greater risk is that he comes up lame.

by DGU on Dec 3, 2008 1:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

%$^$^$^!!!!

I hadn’t even considered that aspect. You’re right, of course.

That said, I just don’t see any way that the Padres can chance it.

by Damen Jackson on Dec 3, 2008 1:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

They can’t afford to get stuck with him. They have to trade him this year, before spring training.

by Wreckard on Dec 3, 2008 1:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I heard the same argument with Roberts last year

The O’s have to trade him to the Cubs. There isn’t anyone else who is offering anything.

by rlpete on Dec 3, 2008 3:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Huge difference in situations

The Padres have a pressing need to shave payroll, given the owner’s divorce.

The Orioles had to get rid of Roberts last year because it was the smart thing to do – which has never really been a factor in any of Angelos’ decisions.

by Wreckard on Dec 3, 2008 3:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

just highlight the text in the article, paste it in this window, then highlight it again and click the "

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Dec 3, 2008 12:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Let's try

"With them signing Dempster, it’s going to take some creativity on their part financially," Towers said. "I think there’s still a chance with Chicago, but I think it’s probably going to be difficult with them as well."

— taken from the above link

Is it really that easy?

"Pounding sand since 1982...."

by cubswynn on Dec 3, 2008 12:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks Bren

"Pounding sand since 1982...."

by cubswynn on Dec 3, 2008 12:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

How about awesome?

If they can just get rid of Marquis’ 9M or so, even if they have to eat some of it, then Id say the Cubs are sitting pretty for Peavy

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/12/braves-preparin.html

this says the Braves are preparing an offer for Burnett….so it appears theyve got their 2 pitchers.

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Dec 3, 2008 12:44 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

"If they can just get rid of Marquis’ 9M or so"

Easier said than done.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Dec 3, 2008 1:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

True, but not completely unfeasible

He eats innings, which is part of the reason we got him to begin with, right?

As much as I love Harden, like someone mentioned above, perhaps he’d be easier and safer to trade, given his history.

So if that Marquis, perhaps Harden

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Dec 3, 2008 2:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think we got him...

because Rothschild thought that he could “fix” him, and the Cubs stepped in with a multi-year offer, sensing that there might be a bargain there. Personally, given that Carlos Silva managed to get 12 million per last year, I tend to agree, although this would have been a better deal with a little less money back-loaded, in my opinion.

That said, I think it’s time to come to grips with the fact that Marquis isn’t going anywhere. Personally, I think acquiring Peavy is a real possibility, but as DeRo pointed out, Harden is likely the odd man out. Better contract, more upside, and flashes of dominance. And hey, if you can turn him into a nice bat — and/or maybe a real shortstop — so much the better.

But there are guys on the market right now that you can give 10 million or less to, without having to part with any assets; including Randy Johnson. Unless, Hendry wants to eat about 60% of that 10 mil or so — doubt it — Marquis stays a Cubs.

by Damen Jackson on Dec 3, 2008 4:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think theres a market for Marquis

Or at least there will be as the month goes on. Ive vacillated on Peavy, but if you have a legitimate shot at getting a 27 year old Cy Young winner and youre the only team in contention for him, you have to do it.

He’d provide reassurance in case Dempster flounders or Hardens fragility rears up again.

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Dec 3, 2008 4:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

We'll see.

I thought the Yankees and/or Mets might be a logical destination for Marquis, but neither seems in a hurry to add payroll.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Dec 3, 2008 9:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm starting to think Giants?

by philadelphiacub on Dec 3, 2008 9:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Possible, I guess.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Dec 3, 2008 9:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think

the rangers

Dear Santa:: All I want for X-mas this year is an official 2009 Jake Peavy Cubs Jersey. Oh and a Beimel one too. I've been a real good guy for the most part!!!

by cubsluver22 on Dec 3, 2008 9:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Why?

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Dec 4, 2008 8:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

just a guess

but as I see it they have a pretty descent offense nothing to write home about but descent. they have absolutely no pitching. seems no big names ever wanna go there. I could see why this would make sense for them. last year of a contract and could be had as a salary dump only.

Dear Santa:: All I want for X-mas this year is an official 2009 Jake Peavy Cubs Jersey. Oh and a Beimel one too. I've been a real good guy for the most part!!!

by cubsluver22 on Dec 4, 2008 4:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

They don't want to add payroll this year.

The only way that they would consider such a trade is if we take Frank Catalanatto off their hands. He is a LHB, but he’s lost his stroke, never had much power, and is a dreadful fielder (worse than Dunn).

"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007

by DeRoMyHero on Dec 4, 2008 5:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I think Hendry backloaded because he intended to trade Marquis

but two bad things happened last season which made that impossible.

The first was the Mets holding up the pitching market, telling guys like Livan Hernandez and Kyle Lohse that they might sign them, but wanted first to look at Johan. Then, they got Johan and passed on the guys who waited. No way the Cubs trade Marquis while those guys are on the market.

Then, in spring training, Lou’s and Jason’s public bickering killed any trade leverage Hendry had. So, Hendry kept him.

Because both Rich Hill and Jon Lieber bombed, Marquis looks more important to our 2008 in retrospect. But going into 2008, Marquis looked entirely superfluous.

So, I think Hendry had planned to trade Marquis after that first season and re-establishing Marquis’ value. It almost worked, and it may still to a lesser degree.

by DGU on Dec 3, 2008 8:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Good points

But Marquis and his expiring contract is a bargain compared to what the Slivas and Lohse’s of the world are getting, plus its only one year, so its not a big gamble, especially if he performs like he did this year

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Dec 3, 2008 11:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'd also add that...

…the current state of the economy may further hinder a Marquis trade.

by dat cubfan daver on Dec 4, 2008 11:01 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Just a guess...

But I think that the Cubs might still be interested in Peavy — if the price is right. The fact that the Braves appear to be totally out of the picture might mean that they can get him without giving up Vitters, because KT has very little bargaining power left.

The downside is that I think the Cubs would have to unload at least two of (Lilly, Harden, Marquis, DeRosa) in order to afford Peavy and a LH bat.

My guess is that they will try to trade Marquis and Harden, then trade one of the other two if they find no takers.

"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007

by DeRoMyHero on Dec 3, 2008 12:51 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

So....Peavy, Zambrano, Dempster, Lilly and ?

That would be fine by me, b/c Im in the camp that wants Samardzija to get a shot at starting….Im not so sure, however, that Towers will lessen his demands

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Dec 3, 2008 1:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

What about ean Marshall?

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Dec 3, 2008 1:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That'd be SEAN Marshall, not "ean".

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Dec 3, 2008 1:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I would guess that he would be in the Peavy deal.

"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007

by DeRoMyHero on Dec 3, 2008 2:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That was my thinking as well

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Dec 3, 2008 2:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Samardzija is not ready to start 2009 in the starting rotation

especially for a team that is trying to win. He should either be in the bullpen or in AAA starting.

by rlpete on Dec 3, 2008 3:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

+1

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Dec 3, 2008 9:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I just don't see Harden's value as high enough to trade

He ended the year injured again, so I doubt he’s moveable until he shows he’s healthy again.

But the fact is, even if healthy, the injury risk is so high that his return value is pretty low. His salary isn’t high enough to really justify cutting him loose with nothing in return, given his upside.

by Wreckard on Dec 3, 2008 1:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Harden definitely has trade value.

by DGU on Dec 3, 2008 2:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I guess what I mean is

His trade value isn’t as high as what you get by keeping him. That is, because of the injury risk his trade value isn’t as high as his actual value to the Cubs.

by Wreckard on Dec 3, 2008 3:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Possibly

I would like to keep Harden, because I think the Cubs have enough pitching depth that his downside isn’t a problem and his upside could be the difference maker in getting a championship.

by DGU on Dec 3, 2008 3:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

One published report and one piece of speculation

The published report is from Yahoo’s Tim Brown. Brown’s post starts on the Giants, apparently willing to trade Jon Sanchez for Jorge Cantu (of that’s true, I’d like to see the Cubs swoop in on that). More relevant though is this:

Indeed, a Padres source said the club had uncovered two teams which could provide the players to complete a trade. The Orioles are believed to be one.

Negotiations are expected to continue into next week’s winter meetings.

Here’s the speculation – the Braves are pushing on A.J. Burnett, so it looks like they are out. For a while now, Towers has been acting like the Cubs are his only option, but rumor-mongers keep saying, “Aw, no, the Braves will get back in.” I’m starting to think that Peavy the Cub is looking likely. To be clear, I’m not saying we should do it at any cost and I’m not saying it will happen fast. I’m just saying it looks likely to me.

by DGU on Dec 3, 2008 1:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

the ORIOLES?

They can’t get TWO team trades done, much less a three team trade. I’m not sure they could get a ONE team trade done!

"That’s the great thing about baseball, you never know what’s going to happen till you get the final out." — Lou Piniella

by drewishdrewid on Dec 3, 2008 1:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

LOL

True!

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al on Dec 3, 2008 1:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

That's why it's good news that there may be a different "3rd team" than the Orioles.

by DGU on Dec 3, 2008 1:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

again...

… they traded some big names last year in Tejada and Bedard. They didn’t move Roberts as we all know but I think people are a little overboard on this since Hendry could not get a deal done with MacPhail.

by dmlichte on Dec 3, 2008 7:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

What's your attraction...

to Sanchez?

by Damen Jackson on Dec 3, 2008 1:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

A strikeout per inning from the left side

accounts for that.

I’d trade Theriot for him.

by DGU on Dec 3, 2008 1:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

You'd trade Theriot for me... :-)

"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007

by DeRoMyHero on Dec 3, 2008 2:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

+1,000

"Have You heard of the Boom on Mizar 5?"

by Grockcubs on Dec 3, 2008 3:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I'm a little surprised....

A high walk rate, and a big ERA in the NL West doesn’t speak well for a pitcher that would be working out of the NL Central band boxes.

by Damen Jackson on Dec 3, 2008 4:02 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Power lefties

Are hard to find. They often take time, and some falter. But you give them a shot.

Power lefties with two plus pitches and a good minor league track record have value. Worst case scenario, someone like Sanchez becomes a closer. Best case, he becomes a solid starting rotation option. He’s essentially what we hoped Donald Veal would become, except he progressed and Veal didn’t, at least, not at the same level.

This isn’t to say Sanchez will succeed, but rather, that Sanchez is a very promising guy worth taking a chance on if given the opportunity. Best case scenario, the breaking balls develop into solid pitches and he becomes a solid “2” type starter. He posted a FIP of 3.85 last year.

If they trade him for Jorge Cantu, the Giants are morons.

by toonsterwu on Dec 3, 2008 5:16 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs

Well said.

And we are in a perfect situation with Sanchez since we could use a power lefty in the ’pen and/or start him as a #4/5 in a post-Marquis world. Bring him into spring training under a new pitching coach and see what he has. If the cost is one of our excess middle IFs (that is to say someone not named DeRosa), do it.

How about this – Theriot and Rich Hill for Sanchez and Burriss?

by DGU on Dec 3, 2008 8:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

re:

Btw, I had a typo earlier. I mean to say worst case scenario for Sanchez, I think, is a late inning arm (and not necessarily closer).

I’d love to get Sanchez and Burriss. I’m high on both of them. That said … I think it should take more than Rich Hill/Ryan Theriot since Theriot wouldn’t be at short there.

Honestly, much as I love DeRosa, if they wanted a deal built around DeRosa and other pieces for Sanchez and Burriss, I’d listen. Not saying I’d do it, but I’d listen, and then use Theriot as a chip to peddle (setting the middle IF as Fontenot/Burriss – potentially our leadoff and number 2 hitter).

That said, I doubt anything remotely resembling that happens. Oh, we should toss Hinshaw into this imaginary situation as well, because I think Al wanted to add Hinshaw (or was it another poster?)

by toonsterwu on Dec 3, 2008 9:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Hows this..

Theyre about to sign Renteria, so I dont know what theyd do with Theriot…..who plays second for SF, I could see that working though.

Sanchez walks way too many guys and has been protected by that park

Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.

by bren on Dec 3, 2008 11:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

frandsen

likely will get a shot at 2nd. I think their thinking with Renteria is to slide Burriss over to 2nd, as a Giants fan suggested the other day.

by toonsterwu on Dec 3, 2008 11:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

With the Braves edging out

even Dave O’Brien is acknowledging that a bit now, I’d cut the deal down a lot. Leave Vitters out. See what sort of leeway Towers has.

by toonsterwu on Dec 3, 2008 5:18 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Me too.

If we are it, then the deal should be heavily in our favor and Vitters should be off the table. As much as I still want to believe in Pie, he may have to become a centerpiece of a deal then. Or maybe Colvin?

Either way, Peavy is a luxury right now albeit one I would not mind having.

100 years would have been nice, but 101 years still has a nice ring to it.

by airweino on Dec 3, 2008 11:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

I see Harden

as a very dominant pitcher. Although i do acknowledge his high injury risk. But it seems like you can count on him almost every start(that he makes) for 6 IP or so and at most 4 hits or so and around 10 K’s if we can back him with a few runs and have a bullpen ready to close it out…… But besides all that i wish he could work deeper into games.

by nick_reny on Dec 3, 2008 11:24 PM CST reply actions 0 recs