Balta1701 Posted June 6, 2011 Author Share Posted June 6, 2011 I'd certainly add Boston to that list since it appears Matsuzaka is gone for the long term and Wakefield probably isn't a full time starter any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 01:01 PM) I'd certainly add Boston to that list since it appears Matsuzaka is gone for the long term and Wakefield probably isn't a full time starter any more. With the chips they have, I think they would look to raid someone like Minnesota long before looking at Z even for cheap. Most importantly, I also don't see them bringing in those kind of guys after the way the Manny era ended up there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 6, 2011 Author Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 02:04 PM) With the chips they have, I think they would look to raid someone like Minnesota long before looking at Z even for cheap. Most importantly, I also don't see them bringing in those kind of guys after the way the Manny era ended up there. If the Cubs are insisting on "Raiding" someone they may as well just pitch him for the rest of his contract and pretend that these incidents never happened. That's the closest they'll get to getting value out of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 01:09 PM) If the Cubs are insisting on "Raiding" someone they may as well just pitch him for the rest of his contract and pretend that these incidents never happened. That's the closest they'll get to getting value out of him. Like I said teams know if the Cubs were just going to give him away, they would have already released him. They are going to ask for something if they send $10 million out. That is totally rational. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 6, 2011 Author Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 02:14 PM) Like I said teams know if the Cubs were just going to give him away, they would have already released him. They are going to ask for something if they send $10 million out. That is totally rational. If I were the Cubs, I'd be trying to get some team to absorb $10+ million of the $35-ish remaining on his contract, save myself at least a pile of the money he's guaranteed. I mean, i wouldn't turn down a prospect offer, but if your options right now are "Suspend him with pay for the rest of the season" and "trade him for virtually nothing but at least save $10 million or so"...wouldn't you do the latter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 01:21 PM) If I were the Cubs, I'd be trying to get some team to absorb $10+ million of the $35-ish remaining on his contract, save myself at least a pile of the money he's guaranteed. I mean, i wouldn't turn down a prospect offer, but if your options right now are "Suspend him with pay for the rest of the season" and "trade him for virtually nothing but at least save $10 million or so"...wouldn't you do the latter? Who would take on the $25 million though? If that is the case, scratch the Dodgers and the Diamondbacks for sure. It probably takes out Detroit too, but it is possible Little Ceasar could decide to throw the cash on the table for him. That pretty much leaves the Yankees. The Cubs would kill to have someone take off that much of the deal. The problem is no one will pay that much to a complete nutcase, who isn't nearly as good as he used to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 6, 2011 Author Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 02:26 PM) Who would take on the $25 million though? If that is the case, scratch the Dodgers and the Diamondbacks for sure. It probably takes out Detroit too, but it is possible Little Ceasar could decide to throw the cash on the table for him. That pretty much leaves the Yankees. The Cubs would kill to have someone take off that much of the deal. The problem is no one will pay that much to a complete nutcase, who isn't nearly as good as he used to be. Clearly I was saying that the Cubs would take the $25 million hit and the other teams would take on $10 million. You can't reply that the Cubs can't afford the $25 million hit, because they take it anyway if they just hold onto him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 02:33 PM) Clearly I was saying that the Cubs would take the $25 million hit and the other teams would take on $10 million. You can't reply that the Cubs can't afford the $25 million hit, because they take it anyway if they just hold onto him. The Cubs are stuck with him, I never said any different. The difference is finding someone who will take on $10 million in your scenario. That again leaves the Yankees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 6, 2011 Author Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 03:41 PM) The Cubs are stuck with him, I never said any different. The difference is finding someone who will take on $10 million in your scenario. That again leaves the Yankees. Are you kidding? The White Sox would take on Zambrano for $10 million over 2 seasons and figure out what to do with it afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 02:48 PM) Are you kidding? The White Sox would take on Zambrano for $10 million over 2 seasons and figure out what to do with it afterwards. With six starting pitchers and a $125 million payroll? Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 6, 2011 Author Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 04:06 PM) With six starting pitchers and a $125 million payroll? Really? I bet you we would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 03:06 PM) I bet you we would. There is one way I could see Z ending up on the Sox, and that is if they were willing to trade him straight up for Jake Peavy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 03:12 PM) There is one way I could see Z ending up on the Sox, and that is if they were willing to trade him straight up for Jake Peavy. If only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 03:12 PM) There is one way I could see Z ending up on the Sox, and that is if they were willing to trade him straight up for Jake Peavy. I'd stick with Peavy, no doubt in my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sircaffey Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 6, 2011 -> 02:48 PM) Are you kidding? The White Sox would take on Zambrano for $10 million over 2 seasons and figure out what to do with it afterwards. At $10 mil over 2 yrs, there would be a lot more suiters than just the Yanks for Big Z. I agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 (edited) NorthSideSox72 I love Peavy to death, but that is a move that I at least research to the fullest. Their contracts are as so Peavy - '11 - $16 mill, '12 - $17 mil, '13 - $22 mill, $4 mill team buyout Zambrano - '11 - $17.875 mill, '12 - $18 mill, '13 - $19.25 mill vesting option Zambrano's option vests with a top 2 CY finish this year, a top 4 CY finish next year, or if he is healthy at the end of next season. The only reason I don't make that deal is that vesting option. Buying out Peavy and saving $18 million is worth it in its own right. The Cubs would be the ones who would have to include something additional, which makes me think that there is no possible way that something along those lines works out. Now, if I believe that Zambrano can be effective in the AL? (I do) Then yes, I make it If I believe that Peavy will not have any sort of sustainable health? (I honestly do) Then yes, I make it If I believe that Kenny Williams is going to be running my franchise next year, let alone in 2013 or 2014? Ehhhhhhh....... Edited June 7, 2011 by witesoxfan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 (edited) If Peavy is healthy, he is a much better pitcher than Zambrano. The Peavy that showed up this year previous to his last start had incredible control and missed enough bats to be very effective. Peavy's arm is fine right now, the groin thing isn't a huge issue, IMO. I wouldn't trade Peavy for Zambrano. Edited June 7, 2011 by chw42 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 7, 2011 -> 12:13 PM) If Peavy is healthy, he is a much better pitcher than Zambrano. The Peavy that showed up this year previous to his last start had incredible control and missed enough bats to be very effective. Peavy's arm is fine right now, the groin thing isn't a huge issue, IMO. I wouldn't trade Peavy for Zambrano. I sort of figure... you've got health issues for Peavy, and emotional/mental ones for Z. I actually think Peavy will get past his injuries, but I am not sure Z can get around being a crybaby and general problem for his teammates. Plus Peavy when healthy is better than Zambrano when not imploding. I'll take Peavy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 I honestly didn't realize that Zambrano had that option when I mentioned that as a trade idea. Scratch that. There is no way the Sox are picking up that extra year, even if they could dump the Peavy contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 9, 2011 Author Share Posted June 9, 2011 It took Grantland less than 36 hours to run a paean to Wrigley Field. The facebook reaction of one of my friends: I like your writing Dave Eggers, I really do...BUT this article is SO annoying. Most Cubs fans I know hate people like you at the games. Way to perpetuate stereotypes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 Phillies with some absolutely terrible play in extra innings tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 9, 2011 -> 02:47 PM) It took Grantland less than 36 hours to run a paean to Wrigley Field. The facebook reaction of one of my friends: Your friend is totally right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iwritecode Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 (edited) QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 9, 2011 -> 11:35 PM) Your friend is totally right. Most stereotypes have a grain of truth in them. You don't draw 3 million people to a ballpark to watch a team win 60 games by filling it with die-hard fans. At least 1/3 of that number is the people that are just there for the "Wrigley experience". Edited June 10, 2011 by Iwritecode Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 I take back anything bad I have ever said about Peter Gammons http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/06/10/gam...ield-is-a-dump/ CHICAGO (WSCR) Due to the Chicago Cubs’ struggles on the field, coupled with falling attendance, the Ricketts family has almost no “honeymoon” period to their ownership of the franchise. Two years in, it’s clear the organization needs a lot of improvement. “The problem that [Tom Ricketts] has, and the Ricketts family has a serious issue, is they’re going to have to understand it’s not only rebuilding personnel,” Peter Gammons, of the MLB Network, said on the Mully and Hanley Show. “They got to make that ballpark livable, it’s a dump, Wrigley Field. They’re going to have to spent $200-and-something million on re-renovating Wrigley Field, do what the Boston owners did with Fenway Park. And the investment is far greater than, I think, maybe they realize. That the amount of work that Wrigley Field needs is, I mean, there’s a ton of money that has to go into rebuilding that.” The Ricketts family would likely be able to handle the issues with the aging ballpark, if that was their own problem. But at 25-36, the Cubs have the third worst record in baseball, and things are progressively getting worse. “So they’ve got it on both ways,” Gammons said. “You know, they have to figure out: ‘OK, we’re assuming unmovable contracts in [Alfonso] Soriano, [Carlos] Zambrano, a couple of other guys, and we have to invest somewhere between $100 and $250 million in the ballpark.’ And that’s a lot of investment, but the Cubs are a gold mine and they are one of the three or four national teams, but at the same time, they require a lot of work.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted June 10, 2011 Share Posted June 10, 2011 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 9, 2011 -> 02:47 PM) It took Grantland less than 36 hours to run a paean to Wrigley Field. I'd say it's pretty good journalism to label the mindset of an entire stadium while you aren't even in that stadium. The rooftops are made to be more of a party atmosphere (all you can drink/eat), as opposed to a great place to watch a baseball game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts