Proof of his sanity, really.
Chicago Cubs right-hander Ryan Dempster does not want to be traded to the Atlanta Braves, according to major-league sources.
At least not right now.
Dempster, as a player with 10 years of major-league service, the last five with the same team, has the right to block a trade to the Braves.
The pitcher instead wants to be sent to the Los Angeles Dodgers, who were unable to reach agreement with the Cubs on a suitable deal, sources said.
Dempster, 35, had indicated that the Dodgers were his first choice and the Braves were his second. With the non-waiver deadline still a week away, there is still time for the Cubs and Dodgers to negotiate a suitable trade. The Dodgers remain interested in Dempster, but their talks with the Cubs reached a stalemate, sources said.
The Braves and Cubs reached agreement Monday on a trade that would send Dempster to Atlanta, reportedly for right-hander Randall Delgado.
No deal, however, can be completed without Dempster’s approval. Later on Monday, Dempster said on his Twitter account that there was no trade.
The problem for Dempster is that the Braves apparently made a better offer for him than the Dodgers, and that the Dodgers also are trying to trade for other starting pitchers
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
No, that's not all anyone is saying. That's what you've said, I'll grant. But that is most definitely not what zonk (and now friends) are saying.
So, zonk, I take it that's a yes. (-:
Well, that and they are going to boo him now because he is still playing for the Cubs.
Actually, that's a pretty mild way of saying it. As I now see it, Dempster deliberately toyed with Cubs management (and by extension, their fans). He of course is free to base his decisions on having earned 10-and-5 rights, family concerns, mere spite, or what have you. Doesn't make him any less self-centered.
FWIW, I never said I'd boo Dempster. Probably won't bother to show up next time he starts, though.
Sure it is. Their reaction is more extreme than mine, but the substance of their objections is exactly the same.
(With the exception that zonk has now apparently gone full-out "screw his 10/5 rights".)
Yes, how dare he think of how it affects him, when there's zonk's feelings that should be paramount in his mind. (-:
I will grant this - if Ryan Dempster knew he had no interest in going to Atlanta all along but led the Cubs to believe he did, that would indeed be assholish behavior. Do you really think that's what happened?
As an aside, why should Ryan Dempster be remotely interested in the Cubs maximizing the value they get out of him when they trade him elsewhere? Shouldn't, competitively speaking, he want his new team to give up as little as possible?
And Dempster doesn't owe the Cubs a trade approval but...
His public comments after the failed trade are what really backed the Cubs into a corner here. If he hadn't gone public with everything the Dodgers might not be aware they are the only suitor. Dempster is free to say 'F the Cubs,I'm airing my greivances' but it's pretty hard to characterize his handling of this mess as anything but very bad.
Yes.
Then I can see why you'd think he's being an #######. Now, I can't see why on earth you'd come to that conclusion, rather than the one where Ryan Dempster isn't a sociopath and just, for whatever reason (even one that only makes sense to him), changed his mind, I have no idea.
Of course - that one statement is at odds with other statements from Dempster. He has previously said he was 'chomping at the bit' for another shot a ring, for example, when the idea of a trade was first being discussed by the media in June. Every public statement from him jibes with the 'according to a source' reporting.
He hung the Cubs FO out to dry - either he was willing to go to Atlanta or he wasn't.
???? "Respect" his 10/5 rights? The Cubs have no choice in the matter. He's got 10/5 rights. End of story. There is no possible way to trade him without his consent. I'd have to re-read the CBA, but I'm fairly sure that since I wasn't a signatory to the CBA -- I have no obligations towards his 10/5 rights.
Is there a clause somewhere that requires me, the fan of a team going nowhere with a sought-after 36 yo SP in the last year of his contract, to grin and bear it when Dempster chooses to exercise those 10/5 rights, and especially, when he exercises them AFTER publicly indicating his intention to move on?
I am saying nothing of the sort. As I said above, my "feelings" on Dempster exercising his 10/5 rights are moot. All I am left with is to express MY feelings and exercising MY rights to express displeasure over Dempster's actions in a variety of forums... and as we sit here, I am now checking stubhub for tix next week with the intention of doing precisely that.
Well, he does have a reputation as a clubhouse clown... I'm just saying.
Sorry. That was a separate response to your lengthy justification for booing Dempster (and the question I posited before that), though since they ended up on two different pages, it truly lost any semblence of coherency.
If he's so hot for a ring, he shouldn't have shat the bed along with the rest of the team in the '08 NLDS. Maybe he would've rather been with the Dodgers then, too. Certainly he helped the Dodgers shot at a ring by giving up a grand slam to the worst hitting first baseman in baseball.
That version of events doesn't mean Dempster's a sociopath, but it does mean he's acting with self-centered disregard for what the team was doing in partial reliance on his previous statements about his willingness to accept a trade. That he "changed his mind" and "had a right to change his mind" does not make his "changing his mind" less selfish.
You know - if Dempster and company hadn't shat the bed in 2008 - I think I might honestly feel a lot differently about this whole thing.
I remember 1984 - and while that team shat the bed in the playoffs, too - it was the first Cub team playing in October in a LONG time. I remember being very upset when the Cubs traded Ron Cey - even though he was a 38 yo statue and the team was creaky old. However, that '84 sort of "felt" like a winner based on the long drought up till then.
Nowadays, I just can't stir up the warm and fuzzies for members of a division winner.
If the 2008 Cubs had won a title - I really do think that even 4 years later, I'd still have enough happiness from the event to basically say "Sure, Ryan... stick around... we can live on memories until you retire."
Of course, if that HAD been the case -- I highly suspect that we'd still have Hendry in the FO and probably a Pinellia chosen successor at the helm in the dugout.
That's what I was saying. I know he's got rights. I just don't like the way he wasn't more upfront from the start by basically saying, "I only want to go to LA." Even if this is said behind closed doors, you at least spare management the embarrassment of working out a trade that would send you somewhere you don't want to go. If he's upfront about only wanting to go to LA, do you really think Thed even bothers working out a deal with anyone else? And by not being upfront until the 11th hour, he squandered pretty much any chance of going to LA since his comments gave the Cubs zero leverage in getting anything really worthwhile in return.
And what if the answer was always, "Well, I'd definitely think about it"? Seems to me there are some assumptions involved in concluding that his statements are at odds with each other. Maybe he was "chomping at the bit" for a shot at a ring with the Dodgers and figured that acting like another team or two were also options would give the Cubs a little leverage, which in turn would make it more likely that the Cubs would get enough of a return from the Dodgers to trade him there. I think we'd have to know a lot more about Dempster's private comments to understand whether he really hung the Cubs out to dry.
I had no idea that you are the all seeing eye. You have virtually no evidence that Dempster lied to or deceived the Cubs but, hey, you're pissed so he's evil. I get it.
That just seems unlikely -
The Cubs had been working the Dempster trade angle hard for weeks. I have to think that the Cubs FO is smart enough NOT to get too deeply into trade talks unless they had at least a very good (let's say at least 80%) chance he'd go. Multiple sources indicated that Dempster had supplied a list of acceptable destinations. Other reports put Atlanta at #2 on that list.
Add to that - Dempster HAS had some rather emotional reactions (his tantrum earlier this week, coming a year after a shouting match with Quade). He's also a bit of a 'clubhouse personality' -- no, he's not Carlos Zambrano - but he is a guy that seems to sometimes wear his emotions on his sleeve.
I suppose you can make the argument that Thed should have factored that in, but all signs --- public statements and reporting -- indicate that Dempster probably misled the FO to believe he was MORE willing to accept a deal that it seems he was.
There is nothing at all to support this idea that Dempster was being the wily helpful soul trying to get Thed as much leverage with the Dodgers as possible.
That could be true without indicating anything approaching malice on Dempster's part. He may very well have misled himself to believe that he was more willing to accept a deal than he really was. But unless he flat-out told Theo that he would definitely go to Atlanta if the teams could agree on a package, then I don't think he deserves the level of scorn he's getting here.
Also, if I'm not mistaken the CBA requires written approval of trades from 10-5 guys, and does allow for it to be obtained in advance of the actual deal being worked out between the teams. So Theo could have gone that route if it was so important to know that Dempster would go before negotiating the deal with Frank.
I don't think anyone - including me - have accused Dempster of 'malice'. In fact, my guess is that your second sentence nails it precisely. That's still dishonesty - even if it's too himself as well as the Cubs.
The two are not tied, of course, but the recent Garza injury really adds to what a screwjob this became for the Cubs. Trades - as I would think we could all agree from the frequency of them - are not easy things to work out. While I'm sure Thed can handle multiple pots on the stove at once, Dempster WAS the focus... he yanks the rug, and bam -- Garza tweaks something now they can't turn back to him, either.
Typical BTF liberal left-wing Obama worship.
Trades being difficult is why I was so down on this whole notion of stockpiling mediocrity and lottery picks before the season started.
Of course, IIRC, your plan was for the FO to up payroll by $70m, so that you could now be 10 games out of first, instead of 17.
But just think of how much better off the Cubs would be had they given Carlos Pena that multi-year extension!
Nor would all that extra payroll have hurt them in the future.
But just think of how much better off the Cubs would be had they given Carlos Pena that multi-year extension!
Yeah, I'd really hate to have Carlos Pena at the market rate right now.
But yes go ahead and mock me even though you guys are saying the Cubs are going to be crap until 2015.
I blame Ryan Dempster.
I do have to admit, though... Iuis Stewbuena does often make me get googly eyed for A-ram... I doubt we'd be appreciably better off than we are now with Rameriz (and keep in mind - the damage done this year came early... A-Ram also struggled early in Milwaukee), but hoo-boy... Ian Stewart....
What is the "market rate" for Pena? Dude's hitting .195 with a 92 OPS+. No one's trading anything of value to get him, even if trades weren't so difficult. It's not like he's even hitting well lately to get the eye of potential trade partners. In what way are they better off with him than LaHair, even if they hadn't called up Rizzo?
That's a clown comment, bro.
Pena got a 1 year 7.5 million dollar contract. That's the market rate for him so the Cubs could have offered him something like 8 or 9 million and got him. Which is what I said the Cubs should do which was to pay the going rate for him.
Plus, they wouldn't have dumped Andrew Cashner because a retooling contender doesn't boot one of its best five starting pitchers for a minor leaguer whose only position is already filled.
I have no idea why this would be true. Andrew Cashner isn't a starting pitcher.
Cashner started one game in 2011 and he started 3 games in 2012 so far. His first start came on June 9th when he went 2.1 innings, he then started on June 28th and went 6.1 innings and his final start came on July 3rd and he went 2 innings.
That's part of why I didn't mind the trade; Cashner strikes me as the kind of pitcher who will be effective, but injury prone.
Yes, as was his 2011 start. He was used as a reliever in 2011 only after coming back in September from his injury sustained in the start. When he comes off the DL he will be a starter again.
EDIT: and whether Cashner would have been a member of the rotation or the Cubs' best reliever is kind of beside the point. He would have broken ST on the 25 man roster as a Cub and contending teams don't trade real contributors for prospects who aren't ready for the show.
As I said in the offseason the Cubs were a team could try and contend this year while also building for the future. They have the resources to do both and could have done both.
As I said in the offseason the Cubs were a team could try and contend this year while also building for the future. They have the resources to do both and could have done both.
If you are of the opinion that 2012 has borne this out then there is probably no point in further discussion.
Says the guy who has been peddling Soriano's contract in virtually every thread posted on this site.
Yeah and it isn't like he played in 2010 in the majors or anything. AGain, if you think Andrew Cashner was one of the 5 best options for the starting rotation heading into this season, well, I guess there is no further point in discussing this.
If you are of the opinion that 2012 has borne this out then there is probably no point in further discussion.
The 2012 team as assembled isn't the team I wanted so I'm not sure how it is proof that they couldn't have done both. The Cubs got the team that they built which is a team flirting with 100 or more losses.
Says the guy who has been peddling Soriano's contract in virtually every thread posted on this site.
And saying Soriano is available has nothing to do with clearing money to get other players. I said it numerous times in the offseason that the Cubs could afford Soriano and do other things.
And in return Ryan Dempster pitched for the Cubs without complaint for many years. Ryan Dempster has honored his contract with the Cubs. Nowhere in the contract does it say that Ryan must do what is best for the Cubs.
I hope Cubs fans stop donating to his Foundation
Yeah! Take that, charity!
******
Fair enough. But in maintaining his unnecessarily selfish (IMO, of course) position, over only a couple months (not to mention a chance at a title), Dempster should make sure his reasons are sufficient to accept whatever disapproval comes his way from Cubs fans.
---"Yeah! Take that, charity!
**********
Well, Dempster has undoubtedly gotten a lot of contributions and support based on his celebrity and the goodwill he has built up. If his decision damages that goodwill, then what's good for the goose is good for the gander
A poor man's Rich Harden - that sounds about right...
EDIT: AA prospects are Ariel Pena and Johnny Heilweg.
Wow. That seems like a pretty massive steal for the Halos. Segura's stock has fallen a fair bit. I've heard of Pena and Heilweg, but they're not names that stick with me as significant.
Cripes, if that's what Greinke nets, maybe I (and the Cubs) are nuts thinking Webster + more is a fair deal for Dempster.
EDIT: Looking at Segura's line, he hit well in AA this year. I guess I'm just remembering him being yanked around between SS and 2B.
Also, the Angels sent the #2, #4, and #9 prospects in their farm system to the Brewcrew, according to the BA rankings. It ain't Mike Trout, but that's still not TOO shabby.
OK, yeah - I think I Kruk'ed 252... I had a lower opinion of Segura than I should have and I generally seem to run a season behind on AL prospect lists. I guess that's a pretty decent haul.
They don't have any prospects.
And the Cubs aren't being selfish? The Cubs crafted a team that was guaranteed to suck and their plan was to trade their chits in at some point for players that they could control for the next handful of years. How is that being fair to Dempster? How isn't that being selfish and how isn't that shafting the veterans on the Cubs? Work hard guys and in a few months we're going to subject you to a media frenzy over trade rumors and then uproot you from the life you have known for many years.
Well, Dempster has undoubtedly gotten a lot of contributions and support based on his celebrity and the goodwill he has built up. If his decision damages that goodwill, then what's good for the goose is good for the gander
Suck it, cancer #######!
No way do they send chipper to milwaukee in that deal.
This phrase means something other than the way you are using it here.
very good. On the other hand, maybe they want him to end his career in the City where he started.
So IMO Dempster's selfishness and the Cubs selfishness are not equivalent.
And sure he has the right to block the trade, but the fans and writers should certainly let him know that 'there is no I in team".
If anything summarizes why I think the Dempster bashers are insane*, this is it. It's all right for the Cubs (and by extension, their fans) to be selfish because they have some theoretical baseball games to win down the road. But Ryan Dempster, on a decision that only affects where he's going to live and work for the next 60 days, well he's got to get over that self-centered attitude right quick.
And, of course, it ignores the fact that why should Ryan Dempster want to make the team that's trading him away better? If he's getting dumped, shouldn't he only be thinking of what's good for his next team?
* Don't get me wrong, I think fans of a lot of teams would do the exact same thing. The insanity isn't limited to the north side.
Do you think this reaction would be the same if Dempster said all along that he would refuse any trades anywhere?
No, probably not*. But I think a lot of Cubs fans have convinced themselves that Dempster never had any intention of ever playing for the Braves and that he led the Cubs on**, rather than the more benign explanation that he simply had a change of heart the closer the deal came to reality (either because of something about Atlanta or the fact that LA became a more realistic destination in his mind to the point that going elsewhere was no longer appealing). I suppose one needs a villain when his hopes get dashed, so he just looks around until he finds one.
The point is, this is a decision that, believer it or not, really only affects Ryan Dempster. His life is not equal to a few unproductive hours for Theo and Jed (who will spend many unproductive hours on their own) or Cubs' fans temporary lifted spirits. That's the calculation a lot of fans seem to be missing. If we don't think Ryan Dempster is justified in being selfish about a decision that affects him considerably more than it affects anyone else (well, other than Delgado), then it might be time to question our priorities.
* Though you'd still hear some grumbling. Don't ever underestimate the capacity for sports fans to lack perspective.
** Why he would do this is never fully explained.
wow
just wow
a baseball player is no more a soldier than a plumber who works for a plumbing company is. i never stop being amazed at how people really REALLY think the old reserve clause rules should still apply and a player who has any interest in his own life is A Bad Guy.
where are all these public statements from dempster that he would accept a trade to ANY contender from BEFORE the atlanta trade was publically announced?
He didn't say any contender, but he had given preliminary indications to Cubs management that he would accept a trade to the Braves. That's one reason why they Cubs were negotiating with the Braves.
i don't know what "preliminary indications" exactly means. i have seen teams work trades behind players backs then try to force them into agreeing.
has dempster himself said on the record that he agreed in any way then changed his mine? i know ALL about "sources"
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main