Jake Peavy

[nate82]

The Angels rumoredly had offered a deal centered around Jared Weaver, but Peavy was demanding an NL team at that time, when narrowed down to the Braves who lost interest due to the Pads demand for Tommy Hanson, the Dodgers, who they would ask too much from due to it being in their own division, and the Cubs, who almost got the deal done, but our mighty GM dropped the ball.

 

 

I don't see how the Cubs have the prospects to even get Peavy. Even with Vitters and Marshall. Heilman was never on their list of players they wanted he would have been just a filler piece in the trade. The Cubs DO NOT have enough pitching prospects to get a deal done. Marshall won't be traded for Peavy the Cubs will hold onto him untill his value is zero (does Felix Pie ring a bell?).

 

Their was a reason why the Cubs had to get a third team involved in the trade talks for Peavy. The reason is obvious it is staring everyone in the face. The Cubs DO NOT have the pitching prospects the Padres are looking for. I doubt a deal was ever even close to being done for Peavy to the Cubs.

[TooLiveBrew]

Their was a reason why the Cubs had to get a third team involved in the trade talks for Peavy. The reason is obvious it is staring everyone in the face. The Cubs DO NOT have the pitching prospects the Padres are looking for. I doubt a deal was ever even close to being done for Peavy to the Cubs.

 

You seem to ignore the fact that Vitters alone would fetch at least one top-flight arm. What's so wrong with the Cubs needing to involve a third team if they can get a deal done? It's not really any sign of weakness imo... just logistics. If the Pads wanted a top positional prospect, Peavy would probably already be a Cub.

[logan82]

I am not familiar with the Padres farm system, but I don't think they really have to trade Peavy. It seems pretty similar to the Sheets situation with the Brewers when they were bad. People kept saying we had to trade Sheets but we kept him around and he helped us make the playoffs. Obviously Peavy is a little older.

[nate82]

You seem to ignore the fact that Vitters alone would fetch at least one top-flight arm. What's so wrong with the Cubs needing to involve a third team if they can get a deal done? It's not really any sign of weakness imo... just logistics. If the Pads wanted a top positional prospect, Peavy would probably already be a Cub.

Those trades are very rare. It would take VItters plus some pitching prospects that the Cubs do not have. The Cubs would need a third party to come in and have to give them something. It wouldn't be just what the Cubs have plus what they could get for Vitters from another team. The Padres would probably want Vitters also along with the pitching prospects.

 

Look at the proposed Atlanta deal and look at the Cubs deal. The reported deal was Escobar, Gorkys Hernandez or Jordan Schafer, and one or two pitching prospects. This was reported in November. By using this basis it would take Vitters (About equal to Schafer), Fotenot, plus some pitching prospects the Cubs do not have. Do you know see why I am saying they do not have the prospects to trade for Peavy? I'm not ignoring Vitters at all I am including him in the deal and weighing his value into the trade and comparing it to one that was rumored to be on the table. Escobar was known to be on the table for Peavy Schafer, Reyes, and Morton were also known to be available to the Padres. Hanson at all times was not available.

 

The Cubs need to bring in a third team to get the trade done and I don't see who they are going to trade to get the players needed to bring in Peavy. I doubt the Padres are going to just trade Peavy for nothing they will probably just sit on it until they get a trade they like.

[endaround]

The one player they could have used to get stuff for Peavy they dumped in DeRosa. Who else on that team is extraneous and has value?

[nate82]

The one player they could have used to get stuff for Peavy they dumped in DeRosa. Who else on that team is extraneous and has value?

And they got very little for him. They also got rid of Ceda I believe it is who also could have been in the mix. The Padres sure do love relief pitchers.

[TooLiveBrew]

This was reported in November. By using this basis it would take Vitters (About equal to Schafer), Fotenot, plus some pitching prospects the Cubs do not have. Do you know see why I am saying they do not have the prospects to trade for Peavy? I'm not ignoring Vitters at all I am including him in the deal and weighing his value into the trade and comparing it to one that was rumored to be on the table.

 

Yes I see now, and thank you for bringing that up. I didn't follow the Peavy soap opera as closely as you did this offseason, and clearly missed the boat. So thanks http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[bigjase]

I see there is a insider article on ESPN about Peavy to Milwaukee. I'm guessing this is just an article about how we might be interested?

[Invader3K]

Paul Sullivan of the Chicago Tribune also has an article up about how the Brewers could pursue him later this season.

[endaround]

Good chance Sullivan wrote the article and ESPN is charging you to tell you Sullivan wrote said article.

[Invader3K]

Yeah, could be. Sullivan seems to just be rehashing stuff...basically saying the Cubs could be in on him, but the Brewers may try to get him because it makes sense, and so Chicago doesn't get him, etc. Just kind of summarizing the obvious.

[TooLiveBrew]

Good chance Sullivan wrote the article and ESPN is charging you to tell you Sullivan wrote said article.

 

Ha! ESPN strikes again. 'ESPN's [insert name here] is reporting that he read in another newspaper that...'

[logan82]

Good chance Sullivan wrote the article and ESPN is charging you to tell you Sullivan wrote said article.

 

I remember seeing them do that a few times with JSOnline articles. They would let you read the first part and it is easy to realize they were just JS articles.

[Invader3K]

Doug is going to have to do something sooner than later if we are going to compete. I don't know if Peavy is the answer, but we're going to need somebody who is actually good if Suppan keeps going like he has.

[TheCrew07]

lets say that this team is a 77 win team, what good is making a move to get to 81 wins? What if you're chasing something that just isn't in the cards?

 

It's only been 2 series...

[endaround]

Since its an 85 team we don't have to say that.

[TheCrew07]

An 85 win team on paper sure, I'm talking about the actual results of the games when all is said and done.

[silversurferr]

Peavy is worth more than four wins if it means getting Suppan out of the rotation. Addition of a good arm AND additional addition by subtraction. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

[Invader3K]

I'm curious if there could be other possibilities out there as well. I don't see why it has to be Peavy or bust here. With the state of the economy, there's other teams bound to be doing fire sale trades come June/July.

[endaround]

Bedard could be moved, Oswalt if he waived his no trade clause, Halladay has been mentioned numerous times, Buerhle and Contreas

[paul253]

If we are going to go after Peavy, whats the point in waiting? It would definitely increase the odds of making the playoffs this season. Plus, what happens if Escobar gets hurt? All of a sudden we have no centerpiece and can't get a deal done. The pitching has been dreadful this season so far. If we are going to get him, get him now.

[Invader3K]

Halladay would be amazing, but I can't imagine what it would take to get him.

[twobrewers]

I don't think the Brewers are eager to take on another 10+ million in salary to help a mediocre Brewers team.

 

I've always thought that 2008 was a push year for the Brewers, 2009 was a rebuild year, and 2010 would introduce the second wave of players to make another push. I just don't see the point in making a blockbuster trade this year - at the expense of the future.

 

I can't see anyway the Brewers aren't better in 2010.

 

With that in mind, if they do make a trade, I think it will be for a young player blocked at his major league team. (Such as Phil Hughes, Clay Buchholz or Homer Bailey) These players have a long-term future and won't push the payroll above its limits.

[TheCrew07]

I agree with your premise twobrewers, not really into your players though, especially if we're dropping for them.

 

I can see why people like Hughes, but he's really tailed off after getting hurt during his rookie campaign, this year should be defining for him. I'm not sure what we'd be getting in him anymore.

 

Buchholz is intriguing but he gave up a ton of HRs last year, got hit hard, and walked too many guys at the MLB level. He reminds me a little of bit of Parra in that he'll nibble too much.

 

Bailey.. no way under any circumstances would I want him as anything other than a throw in. He's another guy that gives up way too many HRs (5 in 8IP so far this season), and a 2 to 1 K:BB ratio in the minors stinks for someone with his raw ability. It looks to me like 2006 and his 150Ks was an outlier in his career.

 

There's a reason these guys are blocked, they haven't performed very well recently. As good as Buchholz was in 2007, he didn't pitch near that level last season. Hughes is tough to get a read on... he went from super prospect to AAA depth in 2 seasons for NYY, and Bailey hasn't put up good number in the minors or majors since the Reds pushed him up to MLB in 2007, he was horrible last season.

[southpaw121505]

I agree with twobrewers. I'd rather trade for young arm we can control for a while. That's why I'd be reluctant to trade for Halladay considering how much we'd have to give up for another rental.

 

I'd love to have Buccholz, I think the fact that he's in AAA has more to do with Boston's ridiculous depth. If he's in just about any other organization I'd bet he's in their rotation right now. Why not start the younger guy with options in the minors and give the veterans the first shot? Becket, Lester, Daiske, Penny, Wakefield, Smoltz(not sure when he's returning).