Jump to content

Cubs showing interest in Bedard


theobird

Recommended Posts

I would not be upset to see Tyler Colvin coming back in a blockbuster trade. Granted that would be just another outfielder to add to our depth, he is still a year away or so. I got to see him play while he was at Clemson. I loved watching him in the field and at bat, he was amazing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Which would you take?

Honestly I'd be very torn.

I am very high on Adam Jones and his potential. He's the best name out there, and always has been IMO. Clement I'm less sold on, but his position makes him valuable, and potentially very valuable.

I like Hamilton a lot, although I don't imagine MacPhail will take that gamble, and I can't imagine the Reds making him the #3 in any deal. I like the M's stuff better than Cueto/Bailey + Votto, although if Stubbs is out there as the third, it gets really tough to call.

A compelling argument can be made for spreading the risk across five guys instead of two.

Ultimately I'd probably take the M's package, if it included a third guy I liked a lot. If not, then I'd be in search of a three-sided coin to flip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would Clement, Jones and Tillman over a Cubs offer....And, if the Cubs put 5 or 6 guys on the table, i think we could get the M's to throw in another player(maybe Sherrill?)

The bigger question is, could we also get either team to back a guy like Huff in the deal?

I still like the idea of Clement, Jones, Tillman and Sexson for Bedard and Huff.

If we can eek out another player from the M's that would be good as well.

SG, what is your thinking on including Sexson and Huff in a Mariners deal? Clement, Jones, and Tillman for Bedard alone should be a feasible deal.

Also, their deadwood for our deadwood would seem to be a wash, except that our deadwood has a better chance of being productive next year, and binging something of value at the deadline. (Of Gibbons, Payton, and Huff, AH is the one who seems most useful to me).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ultimately I'd probably take the M's package, if it included a third guy I liked a lot. If not, then I'd be in search of a three-sided coin to flip.

The third guy is probably the hangup with both the Reds and the Ms. Either way, we presumably get two MLB-ready elite prospects.

I just have a hunch that in two or three years, we will be kicking ourselves for not taking the Mariners deal, if that's the way it goes down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When? I have never heard of this before....

It happens. Jeremy Bonderman was designated the PTBNL in the Jeff Weaver trade, as an example of it. In your extreme examples the solution is simple - cash or a new player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would that work exactly?

Sorry, clearly that should've read, "If Hendry is talking to MacPhail about Bedard, it's because he's serious about acquiring him."

I don't think there's any way to know how serious these discussions are. My gut tells me they are mostly a ploy though. GMs do it all the time, Hendry included I'm sure. It's just a way of putting a little pressure on teams to speed up the process.

I hear what you're saying, but what I'm telling you is that Hendry doesn't tend to go about his business that way.

Now Hendry may just be "kicking the tires" on Bedard, and the conversation maybe was short and led quickly to a deadend. But Hendry's motivation for inquiring was almost certainly not to pressure the Reds into overpaying, or speed up some process or whatever. If he asked, it's because he genuinely was interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now Hendry may just be "kicking the tires" on Bedard, and the conversation maybe was short and led quickly to a deadend. But Hendry's motivation for inquiring was almost certainly not to pressure the Reds into overpaying, or speed up some process or whatever. If he asked, it's because he genuinely was interested.

I agree that this is probably the most likely scenario. I imagine it is the Orioles who decided to "accidentally" tell a reporter that the Cubs inquired on Bedard. It's the Orioles who stand to gain the most from that getting public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SG, what is your thinking on including Sexson and Huff in a Mariners deal? Clement, Jones, and Tillman for Bedard alone should be a feasible deal.

Also, their deadwood for our deadwood would seem to be a wash, except that our deadwood has a better chance of being productive next year, and binging something of value at the deadline. (Of Gibbons, Payton, and Huff, AH is the one who seems most useful to me).

Because we get rid of the roster spot of Huff in 2009 plus I think Sexson could bounce back in OPACY and end up getting us some players back at the deadline or be worth a pick or 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cubs could provide return for a Bedard/Roberts deal:

Vitters 3B, Colvin OF, Gallagher P, Veal P, and Tony Thomas 2B.

http://www.armchairgm.com/Chicago_Cubs_2008_Top_Ten_Prospects

Vitters could develop and we could use Moore at 3b for our current solution or substitue Pie for him. Colvin is expected to compete with Pie in CF, we know Gallagher, Veal looks ot be a project, and Thomas is a pure hitter. Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When?

I have never heard of this before....A team waiting designating a player right now and then waiting 6 months to take possession of that player?

What happens if he gets hurt? Dies? Gets into a car accident and goes into a coma?

Then, one of the key pieces in the trade, for 2 of your star players, is big time damaged goods or never plays for ever.

I just don't see that happening.

Those things can happen to anyone in our farm system. What difference would it make?

EDIT: I just noticed your "under our watch" reply.

I understand that, but I still think that any deal of Bedard AND Roberts to the Cubs better bring back several of their best guys and Vitters is certainly one of them. I'd take that chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

just an FYI, the league requires that in any trade involving a PTBNL, a cash contingent be agreed upon that would replace the player in case something should happen to him in the intervening time.

I imagine for a guy like Vitters, that would be a pretty large cash contingent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cubs could provide return for a Bedard/Roberts deal:

Vitters 3B, Colvin OF, Gallagher P, Veal P, and Tony Thomas 2B.

http://www.armchairgm.com/Chicago_Cu..._Ten_Prospects

Vitters could develop and we could use Moore at 3b for our current solution or substitue Pie for him. Colvin is expected to compete with Pie in CF, we know Gallagher, Veal looks ot be a project, and Thomas is a pure hitter. Any thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...