Warming Up the Hot Stove
The entire TCR staff is still in mourning, what can we say, we take this shit personally. A relatively decent rumor though has gone through the wires as we start prepping for the most inconsequential regular season ever for the Cubs - the 2009 season. Because even if the Cubs are fielding an All-Star at every position, win 120 games and outscore their opponents by five runs a game, none of that shit will matter to anyone until they win some playoff games and get to the World Series.
As for the rumor, the Padres are suffering some money problems as one of their owners is in the middle of divorce proceedings that may cause him to sell his 49% stake in the club. The Padres debunked that rumor...sort of, but nonetheless San Diego is a pretty small market and are coming off a 99-loss season with not a whole lot of talent to build upon. They did have quite a few injuries last year, but not enough to warrant that bad a season.
If they do go the rebuild process, they're best trading chip would be their ace pitcher Jake Peavy and he is available for the right price. It doesn't sound like the Padres have to move him like the Twins did with Johan Santana this last offseason. Santana was going to be a pending free agent after 2008 while Peavy signed an extension last offseason that wil pay him, $11 M in 2009, $15 M in 2010, $16 M in 2011, $17 M in 2012 and a $22 M team option with a $4 M buyout in 2013. The tricky part is Peavy has a no-trade clause so he basically gets his say on where he gets to go.
Good news is that if you have dreams of Peavy wearing a Cubs uniform next season, his agent Barry Axelrod said that Peavy has a strong desire to stay in the National League and even went on mention specifically the cities of Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles and St. Louis. I don't doubt that any of those teams could make a legitimate run at Peavy although I'm quite sure the Padres will avoid the Los Angeles Dodgers if at all possible.
But do the Cubs have what it takes to land Peavy? Well, that sure is the million dollar question. The other question is if his elbow problems from last year are a cause for concern and at least one armchair pitching coach believes it will be. That's one for the doctors and trainers to discuss, or if you're the Cubs one for them to completely ignore and carry on like everything will be just fine.
The cost for Johan Santana last year was four pretty decent prospects from the Mets system, but the Twins were backed up against the proverbial rock and a hard place last season so it sounded like they took a lesser deal. I think four prospects is a pretty good barometer although the quality of them might have to be a little higher than the Mets gave up with Peavy already under contract.
If I had to formulate a guess on the type of players it might take to get Peavy in a Cubs uniform I would guess something along the lines of - Rich Hill, Felix Pie, Jose Ceda and one of Jeff Samardzija, Geovany Soto or Carlos Marmol. Now Samardzija has a no-trade clause and I doubt that the Soto or Marmol would be available, but if you're the Padres I think those are the quality of players they would want. Hill could do wonders in that ballpark with his flyball tendencies and the Padres have always had an affection for Felix Pie. But both now are on the "damaged goods" side of the equation and that's going to lower they're value. Ceda would be a gift for that Todd Walker trade that brought him here and then if you're the Padres and trading Jake Peavy, I think you need to at least get one ready for the majors now with 4-5 years of club control player and that's why I mentioned Samardzija, Soto or Marmol. I doubt they'd get moved and maybe there's another Cubs in the system that could get it done, but as I said, I think that's the type of players the Padres would ask for, even if not those individual names.
And if the Cubs do start talking with the Padres, I hope they do a little inquiry on one Adrian Gonzalez. I do doubt that he's getting moved as he's signed to a very affordable deal over the next few years. From Cot's Contracts....
07:$0.5M, 08:$0.75M, 09:$3M, 10:$4.75M, 11:$5.5M club option (no buyout)
Nonetheless, he's the left-handed power stick that the Cubs middle of the order could desperately use. He's also two years younger and been just as good as the uber-free agent of the offseason, Mark Teixeira. You scoff at that I'm sure, but their WARP-3 numbers (Wins Above Replacement Player and factors in defense) courtesy of Baseball Prospectus.
Mark Teixeira since 2005: 9.2, 7.7, 7.8, 10.8
Adrian Gonzalez: .2, 7.5, 8.8, 8.6
Of course, that means the Cubs would have to move Derrek Lee somewhere and with a no-trade clause, a huge salary and declining skills, that's going to be a tough task.
Back to Peavy, if the Cubs could somehow swing a deal you have a possible rotation that could look like this:
Jake Peavy, Carlos Zambrano, Rich Harden, Ted Lilly, Jason Marquis
I would of course assume the acquisition of Peavy would mean that Dempster doesn't get resigned and trust me, I'm fine with that. I suppose it's possible that the Cubs could actually move Rich Harden in a deal with the Padres and resign Dempster, but I doubt that. And with us just at the cusp of the hot stove league and before organizational meetings have even happened, it's a bit foolish to start projecting the 2009 Cubs roster. Nonetheless, a few embers from the hot stove to keep us all warm at night.
it's day old news, and it's got nothing to do with the cubs, but ichiro signed a $2m deal with MIA (with a $2m option for 2017).
neat. 41 years old and damn close to 3000 hits.
also, rain delays suck.
take that giants
I think that if a team objects to the 1-game wildcard playin game so much, they could just win the pennant and avoid themselves the trouble.
Per Jesse Sanchez at mlb.com, Cubs reportedly have signed 20-year old Cuban OF Eddy Julio Martinez for $3M bonus.
BLOCK: Of course any advantage is an advantage. An MLB, NBA, or NHL team getting the extra game at home in a seven game series is an advantage, I just don't think it is enough of an advantage for winning a division and/or having the best record in a conference or league over the course of an 82-game season (NBA and NHL) or 162 game series (MLB).
TEX takes the opening game from TOR (@TOR) 5-3.
TOR lost bautista + donaldson in-game due to injuries...TEX lost beltre...dunno if any will be lingering issues leading to missed games.
Ride the Kid Magic! Schwarber hadn't homered in a long time before last night.
Greg Maddux was 8-18 in his rookie season. Kyle has the 8 wins down pat.
Think Baby Maddux.
Prof. Harold Hill's THINK system at work.
Kyle is on the far left.
I support this. Hendricks has not only looked better lately but seems to start struggling after a few innings which is better than the 1st in the playoffs.
Just tweeted via Jesse Rogers: Hendricks starting Game 2. Wow. Just wow.
That was good!
Well said. On one hand, I thought the HBP was a bad baseball play -- down 4 runs, put a runner on for a red-hot Fowler. On the other hand, they needed to do something -- I hadn't thought about the warning/pitching inside point. Is Hurdle that smart? He does not strike me that way. By the way -- not clear which fan base you are referring to in your "first" 3rd point.
My unsolicited opinions on topics covered in this thread:
1. I hate the fact that after 162 games, a team could be out after 1 game. However, I think the system is pretty close to perfect right now. 2 of 3 isn't feasible unless they shorten the regular season, and it ices the division winners for way too long. This creates excitement, and rewards the division winners.
Personally, I think the game could have had a very different look had the Pirates held onto the ball and tagged Fowler out on the steal in the first. Cole was clearly frazzled, but if they took that runner off the base, it could have relaxed him a lot.
Football games are played once a week. There are 16 games a year. I'm not even remotely following at all how you can compare the two leagues and playoff systems. It is physically impossible to play a home and away series. The idea of not having any road games in baseball playoffs is certainly a head scratcher.
How is not having the first and last game at home a benefit for the division winners and team with the best record? How is it not an incentive to win the division when a WC team has to blow their top pitcher?
Call me lost.
Two 97+ win teams in a do-or-die, great bullpens, overpowering starters, plenty of pop--hard to believe that game wouldn't be tense. A 4-0 lead is not a blowout, especially in that situation and with the Cubs' young bullpen. Not only would a defensive play here or there make a difference, but you get the win there also on the home plate umps strike zone (generous strike calls for Arrieta, including a couple Ks), and on Schwarber sitting on the right pitch at the right time.