Scot Schoeneweis, Pedro Feliciano, and Luis Castillo should be enough to get this done.

But Peavy ceases to become a bargain in 2010, when his salary climbs to $15 million and increases from there.

there's a good chance Peavy at $15 million in 2010 is still a bargain

I wonder if the Brewers will try to make a move for Peavy. I'm not sure they have the top level prospects to get it done, but they are going to need to replace Sheets & Sabathia somehow.


also, I used to know a guy named Eichelberger. He had the most magnificent jheri curl I've ever seen in person and kept it for over a decade, long enough for it to go out of style and then come back (to an extent). He probably still has it. You couldn't get within six feet of him if you didn't want to get covered in jheri juice.

Well, I was wrong, assuming this report is right.

I wonder if the Brewers will try to make a move for Peavy. I'm not sure they have the top level prospects to get it done,

They do. Plus they could throw in whichever one of Weeks/Hall/Hardy they decide to replace with Alcides Escobar

He'll be pitching for Boston next year. The Red Sox have the prospects SD will accept.

He is guaranteed 62 million over the next 4 years. That is a drop in the bucket for any big market team for a pitcher of Peavy's caliber. The Padres should get a decent return of talent.

He is guaranteed 62 million over the next 4 years. That is a drop in the bucket for any big market team for a pitcher of Peavy's caliber. The Padres should get a decent return of talent.

That's a drop in the bucket financially, but add in the type of prospects that the Pads most likely want and it could become prohibitive for some teams. I mean, do the Halos give up Conger, Adenhart and Wood or Morales to get Peavy for $15 million per season?

Typically, I'd like to see my team trade prospects for young, cheap talent or sign high end free agents that are stars (Vlad, Teixeira), but not do both. That was the sticking point with the Miguel Cabrera deal last year - you had to give up good talent to get him - then had to pay through the nose to keep him.

If you’re going to win 75 games a year, why pay him all that money?

Optimist.

My gut says the Braves acquire him. Probably give up one of Schafer or Heyward for him.

[Which reminds me: I wonder what Webb would fetch back for 2 dirt cheap years]

He'll be pitching for Boston next year. The Red Sox have the prospects SD will accept.

From TFA:

Several sources said Peavy prefers to remain in the NL, which could limit the Padres' options since he has a no-trade clause.

The Braves actually make a fair amount of sense to me too. Heyward and Freeman and maybe Lillibridge?

Is it true that Peavy is legally blind? I'm too lazy to google this, but a friend once told me this. I then forgot and just remembered when I saw this thread.

Wikipedia makes no mention of him being blind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jake_Peavy

Your friend meant that Peavy is legally blonde.

it says it here:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/padres/20060817-9999-1s17padnotes.html

"Is it true that Peavy is legally blind?"

It sounds spectacularly unlikely, but Sports Illustrated seems to think it's true.

do the Halos give up Conger, Adenhart and Wood

Wood is still a prospect? Adenhart might fare well in that ballpark.

Blind as a bat. Luckily, he can take PEDs*. Good old science.

*Poor eyesight disaffecters

To be "legally blind" a person has to have vision of no better than 20/200 that can't be corrected. Without my glasses, I am "legally blind". But fortunately glasses exist and it's not an issue at all. If you ignore the correctability part of the definition then I'd guess that there are a lot of "legally blind" baseball players. Ron Kittle was probably "legally blind", at least.

EDIT: Not to pick on anyone, just to say that journalists can be a bit overly dramatic.

He also has a history of death in his family.

Blind as a bat. Luckily, he can take PEDs*. Good old science.

From the article:

Peavy, who is hitting .214 with two homers and eight RBI this season, believes his new contacts will also improve his hitting, although several teammates argued that his recent hitting surge might be because he couldn't see the pitches.

The Braves actually make a fair amount of sense to me too. Heyward and Freeman and maybe Lillibridge?

The Braves make sense but not at that price.

He also has a history of death in his family.

As do we all.

My Peavy trade:

Boston sends Buccholz, Lowrie (move him to fill the giant 2B hole), Ellsbury to Sandiego for Peavy. Boston's goal is to win now and if they miss out on Sabathia, I could see them making a big push.

I wonder if the Brewers will try to make a move for Peavy. I'm not sure they have the top level prospects to get it done, but they are going to need to replace Sheets & Sabathia somehow.

Wait, wait. If they're willing to pay someone $15 million and up, why not just resign Sheets or Sabathia (CC's going to take a bit more) and not trade guys away? I don't see how you can see it as fait accompli that S&S;are gone and then posit them spending money on pitchers, not to mention trading talent as well.

This makes no sense. The entire goal of developing players and trading for prospects is to get a Jake Peavy and lock him up at a favorable price. If they only had a year or two left with Peavy, that would be one thing, where he "wouldn't be on the next good Padres team", in BP's parlance. But they've got him for five years and at a supremely good rate. Are the Padres really planning to suck three or more years from now? Do they really think that the players they could acquire for Peavy would better contribute to that 2011, 2012 or 2013 Padres organization?

I mean, maybe the plan is to put him on the block and hope they can get, like, three BA top 20 prospects or something, and then pull him back when that fails. But if this is for real, it's stupid.

Boston sends Buccholz, Lowrie (move him to fill the giant 2B hole), Ellsbury to Sandiego for Peavy. Boston's goal is to win now and if they miss out on Sabathia, I could see them making a big push.

I don't see any way Boston does that.

Cano, Hughes and spare parts?

Why would the Padres want Cano? He makes almost as much as Peavy, and he's not nearly as good.

At least he's white, so Boston might make a play for him.

Boston sends Buccholz, Lowrie (move him to fill the giant 2B hole), Ellsbury

Please replace Lowrie with Lugo, please, please...yeah I know he's got that fat salary and all, but please someone take him.

He also has a history of death in his family.

As do we all.

Not me. My father is a Highlander.

There can be only one.

This makes no sense. The entire goal of developing players and trading for prospects is to get a Jake Peavy and lock him up at a favorable price. If they only had a year or two left with Peavy, that would be one thing, where he "wouldn't be on the next good Padres team", in BP's parlance. But they've got him for five years and at a supremely good rate. Are the Padres really planning to suck three or more years from now? Do they really think that the players they could acquire for Peavy would better contribute to that 2011, 2012 or 2013 Padres organization?

I agree ... but it's exactly what Beane did last year in trading Haren and Swisher.

It is confusing to me. The Padres know they won't get a better pitcher at $15 per; they should know it's unlikely they'll get similar production for $15 per if they spend that money elsehwere.

So, yeah, it would seem they've made a Beane-like decision that they simply don't have the talent to compete in the next 3 years (in that division?) so might as well save the cash and let someone else take the risk Peavy is still healthy in 2012-13 plus add whatever he brings in return.

Who knows how they'll turn out but Beane got a boatload of prospects for Haren. Peavy's not quite the bargain but he's a better pitcher and, with that K-rate, figures to age well. I'd expect the Padres to get a pretty good haul although a good chunk of that haul might be lower-level prospects.

Alternatively, Moores took a bath in the markets last week and it's time to cut costs everywhere else.

Jake is from Bama. Don't get no closer to there than Atlanta! Come on, Jake, you know you wanna be near where the SEC championship is played!

He'll be pitching for Boston next year. The Red Sox have the prospects SD will accept.

Boston could use him tonight.

I have no doubt that Towers will sucker Theo again to taking this overrated filth. Pass.

Wonder when they'll make Adrian Gonzalez available, too... he's owed $3 million in '09, $4.75 million in '10, and his '11 club option is worth $5.5 million. They could probably get tremendous value out of Gonzalez, perhaps from the Red Sox, too.

..."this overrated filth."

A little grumpy since the Rays are beating the #### out of the Red Sox again? (7-1 last I looked)

Peavy may be a bit overrated due to park effects, but "filth?" A CYA winner with a good attitude and a reasonable contract?

Wrong tab.

27. Biff, Red Sox Jinx Posted: October 14, 2008 at 07:28 PM (#2981872)
Boston sends Buccholz, Lowrie (move him to fill the giant 2B hole), Ellsbury to Sandiego for Peavy. Boston's goal is to win now and if they miss out on Sabathia, I could see them making a big push.

I don't see any way Boston does that.

Meh - Bucholz' value is lower than usual right now - he's a good propsect, but he's 23 (or is it 24) and I don't think any Red Sox fan would imagine him being as good as Peavy. Ellsbury is a solid CF, but again, what is his ceiling? Its not Grady Sizmore (Kevin is the only person who would argue that) - its not as a star. Lowrie is the same way - a good prospect, but again, no star potential, and average regular. What the Sox are giving up here isn't much star potential (though Bucholz is likely to be pretty good), but a lot of cheap talent (17 years of cost-controlled talent), and while that's worth something, the talent of a Peavy seems like the deal makes sense - they're getting the best player in the deal by far. If I were the Sox, I'd be far more willing to do this, than a deal with a Lars Anderson, for example.

Well it doesn't really matter since Temple said that the Red Sox are guaranteed to sign CC.

I agree with Biff. I don't see any way Epstein does that--and I live in SD.

Plus, all this time I thought Peavy was filthy. Turns out he's just filth.

Well it doesn't really matter since Temple said that the Red Sox are guaranteed to sign CC.

100% stone-cold lock.

Well it doesn't really matter since Temple said that the Red Sox are guaranteed to sign CC.


Is CC going to Michael Jackson his skin?

A CYA winner with a good attitude and a reasonable contract?

Racist! ;)

CC can take the spot vacated by Clemens, right Temple? ;)

Texas makes sense to me, except for that "prefers to stay in the NL" thing. St Louis has a much improved system, but they usually prefer to make lemonade out of Todd Wellemeyer. Dodgers have lots of prospects, or at least they did.

Dodgers have lots of prospects, or at least they did.

I doubt San Diego trades within the division though. Especially with LA.

I don't see any way Boston does that.

Neither does Jake Peavy, apparently.

Ellsbury is a solid CF, but again, what is his ceiling? Its not Grady Sizmore (Kevin is the only person who would argue that) - its not as a star.

By "solid" you mean somewhere between Juan Pierre and average?

I suppose it's possible he'll pull a Johnny Damon and start putting up ISOs in the 150ish range.

By "solid" you mean somewhere between Juan Pierre and average?

Ellsbury was eight runs below average in PMLV and six runs below average in EQA. He makes that difference back with non-SB baserunning and defense.

By "solid" you mean somewhere between Juan Pierre and average?

That's Grady Sizemore territory!

Ellsbury was eight runs below average in PMLV and six runs below average in EQA.

And the equivalent numbers for Pierre's prime?

I'm not saying whether or not it would be a good trade for Boston - I'm not really sure. I just don't think there's any way Epstein would do that.

And the equivalent numbers for Pierre's prime?

You said "between Juan Pierre and average". You used this as a way of lightly mocking someone for describing Ellsbury as "solid". Unless you meant to say that Ellsbury was below average, your comment makes no sense. If you said "between Juan Pierre and average" with the meaning of "somewhat above average" - given that Juan Pierre was a good player in 2003 and 2004 - why do you dispute that Ellsbury is a solid CF? What's wrong with saying an averageish player is solid?

Or maybe you're just joking that Ellsbury's didn't outplay Pierre's best seasons in his first season in MLB? Seems weak sauce. It's a not incorrect point, I guess, but more a statement about how statheads underrate Pierre's peak than anything about Ellsbury.

Actually I don't really consider Ellsbury average ... you wave it away with "other baserunning and defense".

But yes, I expect Ellsbury to turn out to be closer to Juan Pierre than a good player. He has more power than Pierre but not enough to matter. An 89 OPS+ is not solid in my book.

So I asked. If by "solid" the poster meant "somewhere between Juan Pierre and an average CF" then that is an accurate description of Ellsbury right now. If by "solid" the poster meant somewhere between average and Grady Sizemore, I think that's inaccurate. It wasn't clear.

You can do worse obviously. Ellsbury's worthy of a starting CF spot in the major leagues.

But true, my secret motive is for folks to recognize that, from ages 23 to 28, Pierre posted OPS+s of 89, 68, 94, 107, 84 and 82 with lots of steals, pretty good CF defense (he could run stuff down) and the "big" years were big OBP years. Ellsbury at 24 just posted an 89 OPS+ and while I don't expect anything as bad as a 68 (or for the Sox to play him much if he does), that looks like the sort of line I expect him to have through his prime (with lower OBP and higher power probably). That's perfectly fine but (1) not a player to pay much attention to and (2) the sort of production that usually elicits heckles not praise while (3) Ellsbury is still much more in the praise category around here.

But, as I said, he could go all Johnny Damon on us.

Ellsbury is still much more in the praise category around here.

Clearly you don't read Red Sox Game Chatters very often...

its just business .. right?

Wait, wait. If they're willing to pay someone $15 million and up, why not just resign Sheets or Sabathia (CC's going to take a bit more) and not trade guys away? I don't see how you can see it as fait accompli that S&S;are gone and then posit them spending money on pitchers, not to mention trading talent as well.

Jeff:

Jake Peavy is better than Ben Sheets by any measure. He is the better pitcher. He is more durable. He is younger. There is no evaluation that would show that Sheets is the better investment than Peavy.

Sheets and Peavy would be a financial "swap" from a salary perspective.

As for the talent needed for the exchange, the Brewers front office would have to determine if by setting aside the actual "dollars" is giving up players x,y,z, etc worth the additional quality innings of a Peavy versus the unknown future of a Sheets? Not that ANY pitcher is a guarantee but I don't see how ANY projection system can look at Ben's history and paint a rosy picture. If he pitches more than 400 innings over the next three years I will be stunned. Meanwhile, Peavy will pitch 100 more than that AND with better rates.

So say the Brewers offered the following:

Angel Salome (catcher)
Dave Bush (cheap right-handed starting pitcher fifth in the NL in WHIP--it's true!)
Rickie Weeks (better than anything the Pads have and still only 25)
Cole Gillespie (outfielder)

Now that's four inexpensive guys who address talent gaps on the Padres. No, there is no guaranteed "A" talent here. But the kids can play.

I understand if some charge that my suggestion is a "cr*p offer". I disagree but would appreciate a counteroffer.

Harvey.

First of all, you are dealing with Kevin Towers here. Kevin is going to want pitching, pitching, pitching, and then maybe a little more .. pitching. Dave Bush is a possibility, as he will be a free agent after 2009 and might fetch an "A" pick for the friars. Good K's, good Whip. I'd guess he will cost $4/5mil next season, and the padres are trying to save a buck or three. Thats why they are dangling Peavy in the first place. But I could see it. Everybody knows they need a bat, Towers is already looking for more pitching. Its like he has a disease ..

I'll counter though .. Kevin Towers style.

Parra
Jeffress
Green

And some scrub that you've never heard of .. that'll go on to be a solid seventh inning guy for Seattle in 2016, after being traded up and down the west coast four times.

Red:

Those names aren't going to happen.

Jeffress is off limits. I don't know everything that goes on in Melvin's brain but I know that much.

Escobar and Jeffress are non-negotiable.

Milwaukee isn't even on the short list to be honest. There is a list of teams being floated around that Jakes agent says Peavy would approve a trade too, and it's not good news for Milwaukee, sorry.

link Atlanta, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles and St. Louis .. Because of Peavy's intention to keep his family in San Diego for at least part of the year, Axelrod acknowledged that the Anaheim Angels are one AL club that would draw extra consideration

you can cross LA off that list. San Diego isn't going to trade him there. The front runner seems to be Atlanta.

I of course hope I'm wrong, and he stays in San Diego till his arm falls off.