PDA

View Full Version : B. Prospectus=> Peavy for Big Z?


Stoky44
09-20-2009, 06:19 PM
According to John Perrotto at Baseball Prospectus Peavy for Big Z would not be a big surprise. Sounds like speculation, nothing in the works. This is probably the most ridiculous thing I have heard in a while, and I read a lot threads at WSI. Journalism standards really have seemed to drop in the last 15 yrs.

http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9554

Big D
09-20-2009, 06:23 PM
"Some around the Chicago baseball scene" = wishful thinking Cub fans.

slavko
09-20-2009, 06:32 PM
"Some around the Chicago baseball scene" = wishful thinking Cub fans.

Nailed it through the heart.

DumpJerry
09-20-2009, 06:33 PM
You do realize that BP is run by die-hard Cub fans, don't you?

I'm waiting for their next wish list item:

Beckham for Bradley and Soriano. Straight up, no money eaten by the Cubs.

TDog
09-20-2009, 06:54 PM
According to John Perrotto at Baseball Prospectus Peavy for Big Z would not be a big surprise. Sounds like speculation, nothing in the works. This is probably the most ridiculous things I have heard in a while, and I read a lot threads at WSI. Journalism standards really have seemed to drop in the last 15 yrs.

http://baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=9554

Baseball Prospectus isn't journalism. Sports journalism isn't real journalism, but Baseball Prospectus isn't even sports journalism.

Stoky44
09-20-2009, 06:55 PM
You do realize that BP is run by die-hard Cub fans, don't you?

No, I did not know it was ran by Cub fans, god to know people's bias. Thanks.

WhiteSox1989
09-20-2009, 06:59 PM
I laughed out loud at this. When will they let it go?

Boondock Saint
09-20-2009, 07:05 PM
:rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

You're kidding, right?

WhiteSoxOnly
09-20-2009, 08:02 PM
You do realize that BP is run by die-hard Cub fans, don't you?

I'm waiting for their next wish list item:

Beckham for Bradley and Soriano. Straight up, no money eaten by the Cubs.

You forgot Dump that we'll have to toss in Danks to make
this work...gotta be two for two you know.

southside rocks
09-20-2009, 09:04 PM
So, let me see if I understand this: Kenny Williams went on a virtual crusade to get Jake Peavy into a White Sox uniform -- simply so KW could then send Peavy to the Cubs for Carlos Zambrano? :o:

Damn, I never even thought of that strategy!

Of course, I gave up drinking to the point of hallucinating many years ago ... :rolleyes:

DumpJerry
09-20-2009, 09:10 PM
Of course, I gave up drinking to the point of hallucinating many years ago ... :rolleyes:
You may have, but it is clear that Hendry has not......

thomas35forever
09-20-2009, 09:50 PM
How about we swap ballparks while we're at it?

Lundind1
09-20-2009, 10:05 PM
Wow, talk about one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. Laughable.

DumpJerry
09-20-2009, 10:16 PM
How about we swap ballparks while we're at it?
:bundy
What are you saying there?

RedHeadPaleHoser
09-21-2009, 06:51 AM
We'll absolutely take Zambrano.

The Cubs can have Linebrink and Jenks. We'll eat the Z $ also.

Then they can see Peavy, Zambrano and Buehrle hoist the World Series trophy at the parade on October 29, 2010. :D:

g0g0
09-21-2009, 07:24 AM
Man, Cubbies are willing to let everyone go. Z was their man until this year. Funny how a bad year can kill a love affair.

cws05champ
09-21-2009, 08:43 AM
So, let me see if I understand this: Kenny Williams went on a virtual crusade to get Jake Peavy into a White Sox uniform -- simply so KW could then send Peavy to the Cubs for Carlos Zambrano? :o:

Damn, I never even thought of that strategy!

Of course, I gave up drinking to the point of hallucinating many years ago ... :rolleyes:

Under the Radar baby!!!

veeter
09-21-2009, 09:00 AM
This is up there with the cub fan on the Score today, who wants to trade Bradley and Shaun Marshall to the BlueJays for Roy Halliday. Cub fans are pathetic beggars, with no shame. They can't really believe these deals are possible, can they?

Marqhead
09-21-2009, 09:03 AM
This is up there with the cub fan on the Score today, who wants to trade Bradley and Shaun Marshall to the BlueJays for Roy Halliday. Cub fans are pathetic beggars, with no shame. They can't really believe these deals are possible, can they?

There are plenty of people around here who still think we can package Fields, Getz and Clayton Richard for the same type of return.

There are bozos in every fan base.

veeter
09-21-2009, 09:07 AM
There are plenty of people around here who still think we can package Fields, Getz and Clayton Richard for the same type of return.

There are bozos in every fan base.But the Sox fans who propose that package aren't paid journalists.

Marqhead
09-21-2009, 09:18 AM
But the Sox fans who propose that package aren't paid journalists.

You said it was a Cubs fan on the Score. :scratch:

veeter
09-21-2009, 09:23 AM
You said it was a Cubs fan on the Score. :scratch:I know, but the original thought of Zambrano for Peavy was proposed by a BP writer.

CLR01
09-21-2009, 09:24 AM
This is up there with the cub fan on the Score today, who wants to trade Bradley and Shaun Marshall to the BlueJays for Roy Halliday. Cub fans are pathetic beggars, with no shame. They can't really believe these deals are possible, can they?

They're used to trading with the Pirates every year so they're not up to speed on how the trading thing actually works.

Marqhead
09-21-2009, 09:45 AM
I know, but the original thought of Zambrano for Peavy was proposed by a BP writer.

"Professional" journalism at its finest. I tend to ignore almost everything BP says anyways.

QueerGirrl
09-21-2009, 01:29 PM
They're used to trading with the Pirates every year so they're not up to speed on how the trading thing actually works.

:rolling: That's a valid point!

whitem0nkey
09-21-2009, 02:30 PM
You do realize that BP is run by die-hard Cub fans, don't you?



Can you provide some links for those of us who are not in the loop.

Also I want to add Michael Wilbon for example is a die-hard cubs fan and I don't discredit his opinions on the Sox or Cubs just because he happens to be a cubs fan.

CLR01
09-21-2009, 02:31 PM
Can you provide some links for those of us who are not in the loop.

Also I want to add Michael Wilbon for example is a die-hard cubs fan and I don't discredit his opinions on the Sox or Cubs just because he happens to be a cubs fan.


Wilbon doesn't come up with stupid trades like this that deserve to be discredited.

whitem0nkey
09-21-2009, 02:36 PM
Wilbon doesn't come up with stupid trades like this that deserve to be discredited.

exactly them being cub fans has nothing to do with it its them being dumb.

CLR01
09-21-2009, 02:37 PM
exactly them being cub fans has nothing to do with it its them being dumb.


Only a stupid Cubs fan would come up with this trade.

DickAllen72
09-21-2009, 04:46 PM
I'd take Zambrano for Peavy.....if the Cubs throw in Jake Fox, Fukudome and 50% of Fukudome's salary.

JermaineDye05
09-21-2009, 11:34 PM
:rolling::rolling::rolling:

An ace pitcher for a fatter and insane version of Javy Vazquez?

Keep dreaming Cubs fans. He's not coming there. We got him. We're winning the rings, not you.

EDIT: I should state that I didn't mean we were winning the rings this year but in the coming years.

JermaineDye05
09-21-2009, 11:37 PM
I'd take Zambrano for Peavy.....if the Cubs throw in Jake Fox, Fukudome and 50% of Fukudome's salary.

I'm still not taking that trade.

A career minor leaguer and a mid 30 OF with 0 power does not sweeten the deal.

DrCrawdad
09-22-2009, 07:34 AM
I'd take Zambrano for Peavy.....if the Cubs throw in Jake Fox, Fukudome and 50% of Fukudome's salary.

Fukudome? Isn't he Alex Rios but with walks?

Craig Grebeck
09-22-2009, 07:59 AM
Fukudome? Isn't he Alex Rios but with walks?
That sounds like a pretty good player.

DrCrawdad
09-22-2009, 08:25 AM
That sounds like a pretty good player.

http://home.mindspring.com/%7Edcrosby101/L%20flag%20at%20The%20Cell.jpg

Craig Grebeck
09-22-2009, 09:48 AM
http://home.mindspring.com/%7Edcrosby101/L%20flag%20at%20The%20Cell.jpg
Alex Rios with walks is a pretty good player.

Kosuke isn't quite that good, but he's most definitely useful enough -- maybe not for his contract, but he's an above average CF.

kittle42
09-22-2009, 10:00 AM
Alex Rios with walks is a pretty good player.

Kosuke isn't quite that good, but he's most definitely useful enough -- maybe not for his contract, but he's an above average CF.

He's a good guy to have for half his current salary.

Craig Grebeck
09-22-2009, 11:37 AM
He's a good guy to have for half his current salary.
Absolutely.

Hold on, this discourse was far too intelligent. Let me go dig up a picture of a Cub fan.

DrCrawdad
09-22-2009, 06:15 PM
Absolutely.

Hold on, this discourse was far too intelligent. Let me go dig up a picture of a Cub fan.

That shouldn't be difficult for you.

MARTINMVP
09-22-2009, 07:35 PM
"Some around the Chicago baseball scene" = wishful thinking Cub fans.

The same Cub fans who "speculate" that Tony La Russa might be coming to the Cubs next year. :scratch:

Craig Grebeck
09-22-2009, 07:39 PM
That shouldn't be difficult for you.
Really? Because I believe Kosuke Fukudome to be worth half his salary? Or because I believe "Alex Rios with walks" is a good player?

getonbckthr
09-23-2009, 01:18 PM
The same Cub fans who "speculate" that Tony La Russa might be coming to the Cubs next year. :scratch:
He isn't happy with St. Louis and he has a big ego. I could see him on the Northside for those 2 reasons.

thomas35forever
09-23-2009, 07:24 PM
The sad part is many Cubs fans think this rumor is legitimate. Someone claimed Bruce Levine said there was a trade rumor that would send Zambrano AND Bradley to us for Peavy and two top prospects.

Why can't these people accept that their team lost out on Peavy? If this trade goes down, Kenny would have traded Richard and Poreda for nothing. I realize only one day separates them as far as age goes and their numbers are comparable, but I don't want a headcase like Zambrano walking around the Sox's clubhouse. I am much more confident in Peavy's future than Z's.

JermaineDye05
09-23-2009, 07:29 PM
The sad part is many Cubs fans think this rumor is legitimate. Someone claimed Bruce Levine said there was a trade rumor that would send Zambrano AND Bradley to us for Peavy and two top prospects.

Why can't these people accept that their team lost out on Peavy? If this trade goes down, Kenny would have traded Richard and Poreda for nothing. I realize only one day separates them as far as age goes and their numbers are comparable, but I don't want a headcase like Zambrano walking around the Sox's clubhouse. I am much more confident in Peavy's future than Z's.

It's not going down. There is no trade. Kenny didn't acquire Jake Peavy just to ship him off to another team for not 1 but 2 headcases. Peavy has proven over the years to be a winner. Bradley and Zambrano have proved over the years to be just okay, with Zambrano being a tick above average. Jake is not going anywhere. At least not for another 4 years.

thomas35forever
09-23-2009, 07:34 PM
It's not going down. There is no trade. Kenny didn't acquire Jake Peavy just to ship him off to another team for not 1 but 2 headcases. Peavy has proven over the years to be a winner. Bradley and Zambrano have proved over the years to be just okay, with Zambrano being a tick above average. Jake is not going anywhere. At least not for another 4 years.
Which is why I think this rumor is stupid and anyone who thinks Zambrano has a brighter future than Peavy is either ignorant or stupid or both.

Craig Grebeck
09-23-2009, 07:49 PM
It's not going down. There is no trade. Kenny didn't acquire Jake Peavy just to ship him off to another team for not 1 but 2 headcases. Peavy has proven over the years to be a winner. Bradley and Zambrano have proved over the years to be just okay, with Zambrano being a tick above average. Jake is not going anywhere. At least not for another 4 years.
While it's a stupid and foolish and fictitious rumor, this is just mind-boggling. Don't act as though Peavy and Zambrano are somehow incomparable. Peavy's career ERA+ is 119, while Zambrano's is 126.

I believe Jake will be a good pitcher, but let's not deify him.

Mohoney
09-24-2009, 06:52 AM
I would take Zambrano, for no Major League talent, and the Cubs picking up about 25-33% of the money, if they really wanted to be rid of him.

If this lost season, combined with the sale of the team, forces a house-cleaning up there, I'm sure about 20 teams in MLB would try to put some kind of package together for Zambrano.

The idea of Peavy for Zambrano is laughable, but the idea of Zambrano somehow ending up here and winning a ton of games for us, while we give the Cubs practically nothing, would sure put a smile on my face.

JermaineDye05
09-24-2009, 02:21 PM
While it's a stupid and foolish and fictitious rumor, this is just mind-boggling. Don't act as though Peavy and Zambrano are somehow incomparable. Peavy's career ERA+ is 119, while Zambrano's is 126.

I believe Jake will be a good pitcher, but let's not deify him.

Maybe I was a bit harsh with Zambrano. However my point is that Peavy is the better pitcher and a proven winner who doesn't implode on the mound.

Zambrano has never had more K's than innings pitched in his whole career.

Jake has had more K's in 5 of his last 8 seasons (I'm including this year right now where he has 97 K's in his 86.2 IP)

So looking at that, fewer guys are making contact against Jake.

Jake has never walked more than 100 guys in a season. In fact his career high is 82 BB in 2003. Aside from that he has always been below 70 walks per season.

Zambrano on the other hand has walked over 100 men in 2 seasons so far and has only had 1 season where he walked less than 70 men. That being in 2002 when he walked 63.

Jakes control is a better than Zambrano.

ERA wise, Zambrano has only had an ERA under 3 once in his career. Where Jake has done that 4 times. However I could call this a wash as Jake has had an ERA over 4 a couple times where Zambrano's ERA has consistently been below 4.

The thing I don't like about Zambrano is that he has a tendency to lose it on the mound and will resort to hitting guys or having temper tantrums in the dugout. He acts like a baby and hides injuries from the trainers. Jake doesn't seem to let an umpires missed call get to him. We saw after the ump missed a strike on Mike Jacobs in the first game, Jake then proceeded to throw a nasty slider and strike him out on the very next pitch. Zambrano blames other people for what goes on on the mound. Peavy puts blame on himself. If he doesn't make the right pitch, he'll take responsibility and correct it in the future. Where Zambrano it's just the same ****.

Craig Grebeck
09-24-2009, 02:47 PM
Maybe I was a bit harsh with Zambrano. However my point is that Peavy is the better pitcher and a proven winner who doesn't implode on the mound.

Zambrano has never had more K's than innings pitched in his whole career.

Jake has had more K's in 5 of his last 8 seasons (I'm including this year right now where he has 97 K's in his 86.2 IP)

So looking at that, fewer guys are making contact against Jake.

Jake has never walked more than 100 guys in a season. In fact his career high is 82 BB in 2003. Aside from that he has always been below 70 walks per season.

Zambrano on the other hand has walked over 100 men in 2 seasons so far and has only had 1 season where he walked less than 70 men. That being in 2002 when he walked 63.

Jakes control is a better than Zambrano.

ERA wise, Zambrano has only had an ERA under 3 once in his career. Where Jake has done that 4 times. However I could call this a wash as Jake has had an ERA over 4 a couple times where Zambrano's ERA has consistently been below 4.

The thing I don't like about Zambrano is that he has a tendency to lose it on the mound and will resort to hitting guys or having temper tantrums in the dugout. He acts like a baby and hides injuries from the trainers. Jake doesn't seem to let an umpires missed call get to him. We saw after the ump missed a strike on Mike Jacobs in the first game, Jake then proceeded to throw a nasty slider and strike him out on the very next pitch. Zambrano blames other people for what goes on on the mound. Peavy puts blame on himself. If he doesn't make the right pitch, he'll take responsibility and correct it in the future. Where Zambrano it's just the same ****.
Fair enough. I'm just going off of results. While I think Peavy is a safer bet than Zambrano in the future, he hasn't been that much better (if at all) in his career.

DrCrawdad
09-24-2009, 06:53 PM
While it's a stupid and foolish and fictitious rumor, this is just mind-boggling. Don't act as though Peavy and Zambrano are somehow incomparable. Peavy's career ERA+ is 119, while Zambrano's is 126.

I believe Jake will be a good pitcher, but let's not deify him.

http://gocubs2009.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/cubs_hang.jpg

Craig Grebeck
09-24-2009, 09:18 PM
http://gocubs2009.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/cubs_hang.jpg
Objectivity's a bitch, ain't it?

DrCrawdad
09-24-2009, 09:39 PM
Objectivity's a bitch, ain't it?

Your eager defense for all things Cubbie is hardly objective. Although the object of your affection (http://www.thedocumentaryblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/webelievecubs.jpg) is clear.

DumpJerry
09-24-2009, 09:51 PM
This is getting close to becoming too personal in a negative manner. Let's all back off before someone gets hurt.

DrCrawdad
09-24-2009, 10:00 PM
This is getting close to becoming too personal in a negative manner. Let's all back off before someone gets hurt.

Got it. Thanks.

Konerko05
09-25-2009, 12:41 AM
While it's a stupid and foolish and fictitious rumor, this is just mind-boggling. Don't act as though Peavy and Zambrano are somehow incomparable. Peavy's career ERA+ is 119, while Zambrano's is 126.

I believe Jake will be a good pitcher, but let's not deify him.

Yeah, but Zambrano topped out in 2005. He was still very good in 2006, but his walks were on the rise and I don't really think he's been the same pitcher since.

Even though their career numbers might be somewhat similar using ERA+ (a stat I don't necessarily agree with), Peavy has been a much better pitcher over the last three seasons.

Zambrano 2007

ERA: 3.95 -- WHIP: 1.331 -- BB/9: 4.2 -- SO/9: 7.4

Peavy 2007

ERA: 2.54 -- WHIP: 1.061 -- BB/9: 2.7 -- SO/9: 9.7

Zambrano 2008

ERA: 3.91 -- WHIP: 1.293 -- BB/9: 3.4 -- SO/9: 6.2

Peavy 2008

ERA: 2.85 -- WHIP: 1.180 -- BB/9: 3.1 -- SO/9: 8.6

Zambrano 2009

ERA: 3.91 -- WHIP: 1.425 -- BB/9: 4.2 -- SO/9: 8.0

Peavy 2009

ERA: 3.97 -- WHIP: 1.188 -- BB/9: 3.1 -- SO/9: 10.1


I know Peavy was injured for half of 2009, but since it wasn't an arm injury and I didn't use counting stats I figured half a season was just as relevant.

Zambrano just isn't that great anymore. The guy hasn't been able to post a 2:1 strikeout to walk ratio since 2005 while pitching in the National League. I find that very troublesome for an "ace" with "power stuff."

Craig Grebeck
09-25-2009, 02:01 AM
Yeah, but Zambrano topped out in 2005. He was still very good in 2006, but his walks were on the rise and I don't really think he's been the same pitcher since.

Even though their career numbers might be somewhat similar using ERA+ (a stat I don't necessarily agree with), Peavy has been a much better pitcher over the last three seasons.

Zambrano 2007

ERA: 3.95 -- WHIP: 1.331 -- BB/9: 4.2 -- SO/9: 7.4

Peavy 2007

ERA: 2.54 -- WHIP: 1.061 -- BB/9: 2.7 -- SO/9: 9.7

Zambrano 2008

ERA: 3.91 -- WHIP: 1.293 -- BB/9: 3.4 -- SO/9: 6.2

Peavy 2008

ERA: 2.85 -- WHIP: 1.180 -- BB/9: 3.1 -- SO/9: 8.6

Zambrano 2009

ERA: 3.91 -- WHIP: 1.425 -- BB/9: 4.2 -- SO/9: 8.0

Peavy 2009

ERA: 3.97 -- WHIP: 1.188 -- BB/9: 3.1 -- SO/9: 10.1


I know Peavy was injured for half of 2009, but since it wasn't an arm injury and I didn't use counting stats I figured half a season was just as relevant.

Zambrano just isn't that great anymore. The guy hasn't been able to post a 2:1 strikeout to walk ratio since 2005 while pitching in the National League. I find that very troublesome for an "ace" with "power stuff."
I absolutely think Jake will be the better pitcher going forward, despite the fact that I'm a little worried about his walk rates and age, and very worried about his injuries. Although, of course, the presence of Herm allays some of these fears.

Again, I was responding to this idea that Zambrano has been a "tick above average" in his career, which is insane.

Konerko05
09-25-2009, 03:01 PM
I absolutely think Jake will be the better pitcher going forward, despite the fact that I'm a little worried about his walk rates and age, and very worried about his injuries. Although, of course, the presence of Herm allays some of these fears.

Again, I was responding to this idea that Zambrano has been a "tick above average" in his career, which is insane.

Gotcha. Agreed about his walk rates. He can't let them keep rising, especially now that he will pitching half his games in a home run haven. Do you think the rise in walk totals might be related to an arm problem?

He still strikes out a ton of hitters so I don't think his stuff is regressing at all. I also don't expect that huge of a dropoff in performance coming over here. A pitcher with his stuff, command, and intelligence can pitch anywhere.

Danielgosox38
09-28-2009, 05:42 AM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-27-rogers-whispers-sep27,0,5280968.column

Now Phil Rogers says "baseball people" think it could happen. Where in the **** do they get this stuff from? I would be super pissed if the Sox did this, but it doesn't make any sense, so I'm not gonna worry about it.

Craig Grebeck
09-28-2009, 05:50 AM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-27-rogers-whispers-sep27,0,5280968.column

Now Phil Rogers says "baseball people" think it could happen. Where in the **** do they get this stuff from? I would be super pissed if the Sox did this, but it doesn't make any sense, so I'm not gonna worry about it.
Your first mistake is reading someone as stupid as Phil Rogers. He is probably still beating the Heath Phillips drum.

Danielgosox38
09-28-2009, 05:54 AM
Your first mistake is reading someone as stupid as Phil Rogers. He is probably still beating the Heath Phillips drum.

I wasn't reading Phil Rogers. I saw it on Mlbtraderumors.com, and clicked on the source.

JermaineDye05
09-28-2009, 12:39 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-27-rogers-whispers-sep27,0,5280968.column

Now Phil Rogers says "baseball people" think it could happen. Where in the **** do they get this stuff from? I would be super pissed if the Sox did this, but it doesn't make any sense, so I'm not gonna worry about it.

Key word, "could".

The White Sox could trade Gordon Beckham for Bobby Scales straight up. They won't but it could happen.

Yes a trade between the Cubs and Sox involving Peavy and Zambrano could happen but it won't.

Zisk77
09-28-2009, 12:48 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-27-rogers-whispers-sep27,0,5280968.column

Now Phil Rogers says "baseball people" think it could happen. Where in the **** do they get this stuff from? I would be super pissed if the Sox did this, but it doesn't make any sense, so I'm not gonna worry about it.

i think that "baseball people" = BP. So, no chance, nothing to see here.

JB98
09-28-2009, 01:13 PM
There are few things that would make me irate enough to stop following the White Sox. Trading Peavy for Zambrano would be one of them.

Zambrano doesn't even want to play. He's talking about retirement. I think the "baseball people" who think this "could happen" are all Cubs fans. They've had a fantasy about seeing Peavy in Cubbie Blue for years, and they are just bitter and jealous that he wears the Silver and Black now.

I expect Peavy to be the ace of the Sox moving forward. He is clearly a superior pitcher to Zambrano. It's not really that close, IMHO.

Waysouthsider
09-29-2009, 12:18 PM
Ok, I'm not a big Phil fan anyway...just read his column suggesting that the Sox might trade Peavy for Zambrano...what's up with that? Anyone heard this?

One my list of top ten things that would both piss me off and disappoint me that would be numbers 1-5! Last thing we need is head-case Zambrano...

WhiteSox1989
09-29-2009, 12:24 PM
To answer your question, yes.

JohnnyInnsbrook
09-29-2009, 12:25 PM
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=115665

VMSNS
09-29-2009, 12:54 PM
There's not a snowball's chance in hell that this trade will happen.

That being said, of all the Cubs pitchers, Zambrano is the one I'd most like to see on the Southside. If someone could fix his ridiculous mental issues and get him to drink water instead of Red Bull and soda, the guy could be really, really good.

Red Barchetta
09-29-2009, 01:04 PM
Sure...and the Cubs are going to hold out until the SOX throw in Beckham...:rolleyes:

Jimmy Piersall
09-29-2009, 02:14 PM
Sure...and the Cubs are going to hold out until the SOX throw in Beckham...:rolleyes:

This is correct.Maybe,they might consider taking Hudson instead but
the Sox would then also have to take Bradley in return.So make it
Peavy & Beckham for Z or Peavy & Hudson for Z and Bradley.If the
cubs insist,we toss in Thornton to get a deal done.

Red Barchetta
09-29-2009, 05:01 PM
There's not a snowball's chance in hell that this trade will happen.

That being said, of all the Cubs pitchers, Zambrano is the one I'd most like to see on the Southside. If someone could fix his ridiculous mental issues and get him to drink water instead of Red Bull and soda, the guy could be really, really good.

I wouldn't mind if "Z" became our fifth starter if the Cubs just want to dump salary...:D:

PennStater98r
09-29-2009, 05:20 PM
****ing BP and Phil Rogers are delusional.

CWSpalehoseCWS
09-29-2009, 06:38 PM
Dumbest thing I've ever heard. Makes perfect sense to re-unit Pierzynski and Zambrano. They get along great. I think I would stop following the Sox if Peavy was dealt for Zambrano.

Hitmen77
09-30-2009, 02:32 PM
This makes no sense for the Sox. It's not like this will save any money since Zambrano will make more than Peavy each of the next 3 years ($2.8 million more in 2010). Plus, I'd take my chances with Peavy over Zambrano over the next 3 years.

Just out of curiosity, I checked to see which one was older. It turns out that they were born 1 day apart. Peavy on 5/31/81 and Zambrano on 6/1/81.

SOX ADDICT '73
09-30-2009, 02:50 PM
This makes no sense for the Sox. It's not like this will save any money since Zambrano will make more than Peavy each of the next 3 years ($2.8 million more in 2010). Plus, I'd take my chances with Peavy over Zambrano over the next 3 years.

Just out of curiosity, I checked to see which one was older. It turns out that they were born 1 day apart. Peavy on 5/31/81 and Zambrano on 6/1/81.
Man, I feel old all of a sudden...:geezer:

DickAllen72
09-30-2009, 05:22 PM
Makes perfect sense to re-unit Pierzynski and Zambrano. They get along great.
Actually, both AJ and Zambrano said they got to know each other and got along well when they filmed those McDonalds commercials together a couple of years ago.

Tragg
09-30-2009, 08:31 PM
The most incredible thing about that article is that Phil Rogers continues to advance the notion that the Cubs are going to get a serious baseball player in return for a team taking Milton Bradley off their hands. There is this notion that he was just a "disappointment" and could be dealt for another "disappointment" without mentioning that he's a complete mental case. That is simply beyond preposterous.

And how does a Peavy trade for the Sox shake things up for the Sox? We just got him here. We already shook ourselves up.

Foulke You
10-09-2009, 02:16 PM
The most incredible thing about that article is that Phil Rogers continues to advance the notion that the Cubs are going to get a serious baseball player in return for a team taking Milton Bradley off their hands. There is this notion that he was just a "disappointment" and could be dealt for another "disappointment" without mentioning that he's a complete mental case. That is simply beyond preposterous.

And how does a Peavy trade for the Sox shake things up for the Sox? We just got him here. We already shook ourselves up.
Phil Rogers and the Trib aren't the only ones hyping up Bradley as a valuable piece to trade. Gordon Wittenmeyer of the Sun Times is also doing this. He feels that they won't have to eat as much of the contract as everyone thinks and that they could get a valuable player in return for him. They are delusional. The Cubs will have to eat all of that contract or take on an equally bad contract (think Oliver Perez or Barry Zito) in return.

veeter
10-09-2009, 02:19 PM
This is all crap made up by Chicago's pathetic writers. Any GM that trades for Milton Bradley, after what took place this last season, should be fired on the spot.

southside rocks
10-09-2009, 02:45 PM
This is all crap made up by Chicago's pathetic writers. Any GM that trades for Milton Bradley, after what took place this last season, should be fired on the spot.

Absolutely. In fact, if the Cubs organization weren't such a pathetic mess, Hendry would have been fired for the colossal gaffe of the Bradley acquisition and the handling of MB.

KyWhiSoxFan
10-09-2009, 03:00 PM
Absolutely. In fact, if the Cubs organization weren't such a pathetic mess, Hendry would have been fired for the colossal gaffe of the Bradley acquisition and the handling of MB.

Now that they have a new owner, that may happen.

russ99
10-09-2009, 03:09 PM
Once the Cubs sale goes through, the Trib will still own 5% of the Cubs, "for tax purposes".

I wonder if that small amount of minority ownership be enough for them to continue their ridiculoulsly biased reporting?

Craig Grebeck
10-10-2009, 02:54 AM
Again, I see no reason that a GM should be fired on the spot for acquiring a talented player at his lowest possible value.

Tragg
10-10-2009, 08:22 AM
Again, I see no reason that a GM should be fired on the spot for acquiring a talented player at his lowest possible value.
Exactly the opposite - this was a classic case of "buy high". The Cubs pratically doubled his annual contract (and gave him 3 years) in what was the biggest buyers market for free agents EVER.

voodoochile
10-10-2009, 09:31 AM
Exactly the opposite - this was a classic case of "buy high". The Cubs pratically doubled his annual contract (and gave him 3 years) in what was the biggest buyers market for free agents EVER.
I think he meant if someone acquired him now via trade.

Tragg
10-10-2009, 10:12 AM
I think he meant if someone acquired him now via trade.
Okay - I see. My mistake.

DrCrawdad
10-10-2009, 02:49 PM
Absolutely. In fact, if the Cubs organization weren't such a pathetic mess, Hendry would have been fired for the colossal gaffe of the Bradley acquisition and the handling of MB.

Again, I see no reason that a GM should be fired on the spot for acquiring a talented player at his lowest possible value.

Exactly the opposite - this was a classic case of "buy high". The Cubs pratically doubled his annual contract (and gave him 3 years) in what was the biggest buyers market for free agents EVER.

I think he meant if someone acquired him now via trade.

Okay - I see. My mistake.

Grebeck made that comment following Southside Rocks making the Hendry getting fired for the MB acquisition. I think you were right in your initial response. Of course perhaps Grebeck can clarify or explain his bizarre defense of the Cubbies.

Quoting the post(s) you are responding to is a marvelous feature.

voodoochile
10-10-2009, 02:51 PM
Grebeck made that comment following Southside Rocks making the Hendry getting fired for the MB acquisition. I think you were right. Of course perhaps Grebeck can clarify or explain his bizarre defense of the Cubbies.

Quoting the post(s) your responding to is a marvelous feature.

Gee, you calling out Grebeck...

I am shocked... shocked do you read me, shocked...:rolleyes:

DrCrawdad
10-10-2009, 02:56 PM
Gee, you calling out Grebeck...

I am shocked... shocked do you read me, shocked...:rolleyes:

I stand by my comment that it sure helps to clarify matters if you quote the post your responding to.

Oh, yeah and no one ever jumps down the throat of posters here. :rolleyes: I understand that if you do it in response to "Cubsession" with venomous personal attacks you have what it takes to be a WSI mod.

:)

voodoochile
10-10-2009, 03:01 PM
I stand by my comment that it sure helps to clarify matters if you quote the post your responding to.

Oh, yeah and no one ever jumps down the throat of posters here. :rolleyes: I understand that if you do it in response to "Cubsession" with venomous personal attacks you have what it takes to be a WSI mod.

:)

Venomous personal attacks? :?:

Not buying the smile face at all, DrC and I don't appreciate the accusation and yeah, that's a warning.

Tragg
10-10-2009, 08:32 PM
Grebeck made that comment following Southside Rocks making the Hendry getting fired for the MB acquisition. I think you were right in your initial response. Of course perhaps Grebeck can clarify or explain his bizarre defense of the Cubbies.
.If you follow the line of posts, it does seem like he said Hendry acquired Bradley at low value.
However, that's so obviously wrong (clearly Hendry paid an extreme premium for Bradley), that I still accept voodoo's intepretation that Grebeck was talking about a GM who might acquire him from the Cubs.

DrCrawdad
10-10-2009, 08:47 PM
If you follow the line of posts, it does seem like he said Hendry acquired Bradley at low value.
However, that's so obviously wrong (clearly Hendry paid an extreme premium for Bradley), that I still accept voodoo's intepretation that Grebeck was talking about a GM who might acquire him from the Cubs.

You're right. Clearly Hendry bought high. And I see what you're saying. If only Grebeck had used the quote feature, this discussion would be moot.

veeter
10-10-2009, 09:28 PM
They'll buy low, if they aquire Bradley, and Hendry is forced to eat some, or all of his contract. However, the media seems to think they will trade bad contract for bad contract. Suddenly, Paul Sullivan thinks this is the NBA. If that indeed did happen, then the aquiring GM would not be buying low. The flaw in that formula, is the fact that with Milton, you get a bad contract, PLUS a bad guy. Downplaying Bradley's attitude/antics/delusions, etc., is impossible. I truly think he'll be a cub next spring.