Tigers want Marmol or Castro in deal for Granderson?
I'm not sure how creditable the author is, but he states in the article that talks between the Cubs and the Tigers for Granderson are in a standstill. The standstill being because the Cubs won't offer Marmol or Castro in the deal.
about 2 years ago
Cubbiegoon
30 comments
0 recs |
Comments
Creditable?
Nice
"It's been my policy to view the Internet not as an 'information highway,' but as an electronic asylum filled with babbling loonies." - Mike Royko
(Psst - you can edit the body of your own fanposts/fanshots)
I'm singing, "GO CUBS GO! GO CUBS GO!" -- DrCrawdad on Jun 12, 2009 7:23 AM CDT
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true! -- Homer J. Simpson
by Shanghai Badger on Dec 2, 2009 8:54 AM CST up reply actions
Not sure it says that
The article only seems to say talks are at a standstill AND the Cubs won’t part with Marmol or Castro. It doesn’t say that the Tigers are insisting on them being included. This is supported by the original Chi Trib blog posting to which the author cites:
“Curtis Granderson: The would-be Cub still is sitting in limbo. The Tigers have declined to deny he’s available, inviting speculation. If so, the Cubs will put together a decent package, but won’t part with either closer Marmol or top shortstop prospect Starlin Castro, which could be a deal-breaker.”
Anyways, ’tis the season of rumors and speculation, so this strikes me as no worse than any other.
I don't know how credible the author is
That said, early on, it seems clear that this isn’t going to be a rapid firesale. They were asking a lot for Edwin Jackson (from the Mariners). It’s possible that this is just posturing, but it’s also possible that this is simply what many people have been thinking it was – that Dombrowski doesn’t love his team’s chances in 2010, so he wants to see if he can get a bushel of prospects to help accelerate the rebuilding for 2011, but that if he can’t find the right return, that he’ll simply play out the string with his current squad, since they have a lot of money coming off after 2010 and a slowly improving system.
I would say no
to Marmol and Castro. Jay Jackson, Vitters and other pieces I am ok with.
Lets see how this works out. I just want the Bradley deal to go down soon.
I like Marmol
but I would be willing to part with him in the deal to get Granderson. The Padres wouldn’t be a bad spot to look to trade Bradley. There were rumors early this off season the Padres might look to move Heath Bell, it would certainly be worth exploring. Cash, prospect & Bradley might get it done.
by Cubsfan Waveland on Dec 2, 2009 11:04 AM CST up reply actions
Marmol
I would gladly trade Marmol for Granderson.
There are other closer options available on the market this year. Also, with arbitration coming for Marmol, I don’t expect him to be all that “cheap” relative to some of the other closer options.
Consider the deal Billy Wagner is getting. Marmol will probably make close to that.
Eamus Ursuli!
I would too
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
Who do replace Marmol with ?
Valverde may be the best closer available as an FA and he is going to cost a major multi-year contract. Every time you suggest trading a major role player you have to be sure you have someone else for that role.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Dec 2, 2009 9:17 AM CST up reply actions
Could Angel Guzman close?
You don’t necessarily have to go to free agency to find a closer.
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
The problem with Angel Guzman is
his health is always a question!
I would not want to go into the season counting on him
but I am not that crazy about going into the season counting on Marmol either but with Guzman & Grabow as back up I can live with it. I still think it might be worth sniffing to see what Heath Bell would cost.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Dec 2, 2009 9:53 AM CST up reply actions
Kerry Wood?
He’s on the last year of his contract. I’ll bet that you could even get Cleveland to eat some of the deal.
(The trick is that you can’t have him finish 55 games, or the 2011 option vests. Which shouldn’t be that difficult to prevent.)
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
When he gets past 50
Just make sure he takes a daily turn in the hot tub.
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
Me either Jim
by Doggie Stalker on Dec 2, 2009 11:59 AM CST up reply actions
Looks like the Indians have Travis Hafner as DH right now.
I’m having fun with depth charts today.
Could they perhaps platoon Burrell and Hafner as DH? Or do you think they’d play Burrell over the young Matt LaPorta? (He’s the guy they got from the Brewers for CC, right?)
Catch my act on Twitter as @dat_cubfan_dave.
Just keep Burrell in the mix
since there are questions about Hafner’s health and LaPorta’s readiness, not to mention Andy Marte at 1B?
Is he traded yet?
All of a sudden my wacky trade proposal doesn't look so wacky, now does it?
Well, except for maybe that last part… ;-)
Bradley to TB for Burrell
Burrell to Cle for Wood
Wood to Philly for Victorino
Victorino to White Sox for Peavy
Peavy to Minn for Morneau
Morneau to Bos for Papelbon
Papelbon to TB for…
…Bradley.
IT’S HAPPENING!!!!?!!!?!!!?
Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."
Bobby Jenks?
He’s supposed to be available. You think the Sox would rather have Jake Fox as a DH/bat off the bench than Andruw Jones? If we’re going for it all next year, I wouldn’t mind having a World Series tested closer. Fox + mid-level pitching prospects for Jenks?
Someday we'll go all the way...
by CubsBullsBears on Dec 2, 2009 12:24 PM CST up reply actions
Jenks made $5.6 million in 2009 and is arb-eligible.
Think the White Sox would take Bradley?
"You can observe a lot just by watching." ~ Yogi Berra
Billy Wagner is off the Market
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
I don't think you're going to hear more nuggets about this deal
Until after Bradley is traded. Just too many pieces in the air right now. After the dust settles from Bradley and whoever we get for him, then Granderson will be addressed
"If I were playing third base and my mother were rounding third with the run that was going to beat us, I'd trip her. Oh, I'd pick her up and brush her off and say, 'Sorry, Mom,' but nobody beats me." ~ Leo Durocher
i'd move Marmol in a heartbeat
for Granderson
Marmol’s arm is either going to fall off or he’s likely to be the version we saw last year which is a slightly above average relief arm
if THATs the centerpiece of a deal you do it in a heartbeat
by DartmouthCubsFan on Dec 2, 2009 3:40 PM CST reply actions
Especially
If a deal with Marmol doesn’t involve Vitters. Castro is untouchable in my books!
I would sleep with Blou if it meant the Cubs would win a WS. by Doggie Stalker on Aug 22, 2009 4:11 PM EDT
No Castro
Hopefully Castro is a can’t miss prospect .. I too would trade Marmol and a minor leaguer not named Castro to get Granderson . Granderson would sure solve the centerfield problems for years to come .. And not to sound like Lou a lefthanded hitter to mix it up in the batting order .. I sure do like Granderson’s glove and speed .. Let alone he hit 30 homeruns last season ..
There's no such thing as a can't miss prospect
especially in the case of a 19 year old prospect who is rated so highly based on projection, but that said, I’d like to keep Castro.
Is he traded yet?


















