As the Peavy turns


Are they or aren’t they? That seems to be the question surrounding the Jake Peavy trade talks. While yesterday, Peter Gammons claimed that the Yankees were not in the running for Peavy, today, Ken Rosenthal has a conflicting report.

Writes Kenny:

The Yankees’ farm system is strong enough to match up with the Padres if the teams revive their discussions on right-hander Jake Peavy. The Padres, according to one major-league source, told the Yankees that a deal would be possible even if the Yankees declined to offer right-hander Phil Hughes.

The Padres scouted Hughes in a recent Arizona Fall League game, but the Yankees have zero intention of trading him.

There is, of course, one problem. Joel Sherman, the man behind yesterday’s five-year/$80-million A.J. Burnett offer that was shot down before the day was out (Oops. That was George King. The Post writers are all the same to me.), claims that Jake Peavy will not pitch for the Yankees. (If you insist on a link, tough. You know where to find Sherman, and you all should know our position on linking to The Post.)

Now over the last few weeks, we’ve heard a lot of back and forth on Peavy. Some claim he’ll pitch in New York; others say he won’t leave the NL or at least Southern California. Who knows? Certainly not Ken Rosenthal’s or Joel Sherman’s sources with any degree of certainty. If the unnamed folks knew, we wouldn’t be engaged in some investigation into Jake Peavy’s true motives.

What does seem clear, however, is that the Padres are viewing this trade more and more in terms of a salary dump. If the Padres are willing to put it out there that this deal can be consummated without Phil Hughes, they’re signaling that they need to dump Peavy’s contract while losing some negotiating leverage.

In the end, I doubt that this trade will get done or ever come close to completion, but it does provide us an interesting exercise in interpreting unsourced rumors and varying positions. In other words, don’t read too much into anything that isn’t a done deal.

Categories : Hot Stove League


  1. the problem is, if it IS a salary dump, that invites a bunch of other teams back into the bidding who Peavy would probably prefer playing for.

    in other words, if they are willing to take our B prospects, they are willing to take the Braves’ B prospects, and Peavy might actually accept a trade to the Braves.

    again, it’s all speculation, but it doesn’t sound like Peavy wants to come to the AL, let alone NY.

    • The Honorable Congressman Mondesi says:

      I’ve been thinking the same thing. If Olney is right and the Yanks need the price to fall before they become a player in the Peavy bidding, why would other teams (who Peavy reportedly prefers over the Yanks) not ALSO be players at that point (when the price falls)? Whatever, it’s all rumor/speculation.

    • Andy In Sunny Daytona says:

      Has anyone actually heard from Peavy himself? We hear alot from “friends” and “associates”, but I haven’t heard anything from him. The Padres are, apparently, talking to the Yankees, so that would mean that Peavy has at least given the OK.

      • well, according to Sherman (FWIW), the Yankees have been talking to the Padres, but they have been mostly involved as the third team where the second team gets Peavy.

        Basically, Cashman is just looking for opportunities to insert himself into other trades and find value.

        again, grain of salt, yada yada

      • Double-J says:

        Sort of like the whole Sabathia and his “friends” who say he either wants to stay in LA or is willing to play elsewhere. Hmm.

      • TurnTwo says:

        we do know that Peavy was hanging out with Derek Jeter amongst others on the beaches of Puerto Rico.

        otherwise, no, i dont think Peavy has said anything.

        his agent has been all over the place himself… one day, he wants to only pitch in the NL, and then the next, he could see Peavy in pinstripes and he’s talked with Jeter, etc.

        basically all babble.

        i’m just glad to hear its at least still be floated out there. would much rather have Peavy than sign Burnett or Lowe.

        • Slugger27 says:

          “would much rather have peavy than sign burnett or lowe”

          even knowing you would be paying the same if not higher salary for peavy AND giving up prospects??

          with aj or lowe, it would just be the salary…

          • TurnTwo says:

            yup, even given the prospects.

            the way i look at it, in the end, you’re trading the prospects for not just one top-10 pitcher, but two proven top-10 pitchers after you also sign Sabathia.

            • Ron says:

              The two events are independent of each other. If you just sign Sabathia, you get one top 10 pitcher w/o giving up ANY prospects. If you miss out on CC and trade for Peavy, you get one top 10 pitcher and give up prospects. I fail to see the correlation.

              • TurnTwo says:

                of course they are independent, technically.

                but, when the offseason is finished, and you start to piece together all the moves that were made (players lost via FA, trade, players signed via FA, traded for, promoted from within, etc), you’ll find the system is a couple prospects shorter than before, but added two top-10 pitchers in the rotation for the next 5 years, Wang not included.

  2. Ol Dirtay says:

    You have to figure with Hoffman leaving, SD could want some bullpen help. Also, their starting catcher is either Michael Barrett or Josh Bard, so maybe a catcher. Plus, a starter to replace Peavy’s spot in the rotation. So, how about Ian Kennedy, Austin Romine or Cervelli and Jose Veras or another bullpen arm. Just spit-balling here.

  3. jsbrendog says:

    if it doesnt involve hughes pull the trigger

    i have been against this from day 1 but if it will not take hughes and you can get away without giving up ajax, do it for sure.

    if you have to give up ajax id think about ti depending on what else is involve dbut be much more prone to think we should pull it. the proverbial trigger that is

  4. Evan says:

    you mean won’t leave the NL

  5. A.D. says:

    Kinda sad that San Diego is looking to salary dump their reasonably cost controlled ace

  6. Ivan says:

    George King was behind the whole Burnett getting 5-years at 80M or came out with that rumor/sources.

  7. radnom says:

    Whoa, does anyone else see every single word in this thread crossed out, or am I tipping on something?

  8. RobC says:

    I wonder if this deal is potentially done in Cashman’s mind as in
    if the Padres want Peavy out of the NL and if he will approve a trade to NY it will take an adjustment of X in his contract
    If the Yanks sign CC then Cashman will give up player package A for Peavy if they cannot sign CC then Cashman will give up player package B.
    The Yankees hope in this potential trade is the Padres want Peavy out of the NL if traded.

  9. emac2 says:

    Do you include hughes in a bigger deal with Peavy and Gonzales?

    and maybe some cash?

  10. Ivan says:

    I don’t get no props Ben K for helping you out with the mistake.

  11. Slugger27 says:

    i gotta agree with ben, it just doesnt seem like theres anything to really look into here…. they dont have to have hughes? great. that doesnt mean we automatically jump into negotiations

    cashmans job is to constantly assess the trade market and see if theres ANYWHERE he can find good value, which is exactly what hes doing… he probably knows a deal is a long shot, but as a GM, its his job to be searching 24/7 for what could potentially be a valuable trade that would make the team better

    ive never been really on board with a peavy trade, and while hughes not being offered does sweeten the pot, it doesnt necessarily change my thinking

    at any rate, i like that cashman is involved for every player availabe, he SHOULD be, thats what being GM for the yankees is all about… assessing every players value, comparing it with value you are willing to give up, and seeing if theres a fit

  12. Moose Returns! says:

    Cano and IPK for Peavy.

    Get Orlando Hudson to fill-in for Cano.

    Sign CC and Burnett.

    Game over.

  13. Matt M. says:

    and keep in mind, that NOT phil hughes would probably entail some factor of ajax / jesus montero as a centerpiece.

    i mean it would be a videogame rotation of Peavy, CC, Wang, Joba, (whoever)

    we all know that young cost controlled SP is probably the most coveted asset in the game, but young premium position players are too. and Ajax and Jesus (currently at least) fit that second bill.

    obviously you have to give talent to get talent and if our rotation can look like that above…we’ll figure out that outfield when the cross that bridge, but theyre not gonna dump peavy on us on a deal centered on the likes of IPK or something else that we’re overly willing to part with.

    • Slugger27 says:

      but if the owner is telling towers that peavy has to be traded cuz hes just on in the budget for our lousy, last place team… then they could possibly be willing to settle for lesser prospects

      clearly, nobody here knows whats really going on, but like ben said, its looking more and more like a salary dump, and if thats the case, they might be willing to take an ipk-centered package… u never know

  14. Jamal G. says:

    I was trying to come up with some packages that would entice the Padres, but I could only come up with this conclusion: it’s quite idiotic to do so. However, I did discover something quite interesting in reviewing the talent in the Yankees’ upper-level, Minor League system. What is it, you ask? Well, to put it bluntly, perception is a mother fucker.

    Player A’s Minor League stats as a starter: 209. 2 IP; 2.73 FIP; .193 BAA; 0.96 WHIP; 2.66 B/9; 9.83 K/9; 0.39 HR/9; 14.6 LD%

    Player B’s Minor League stats as a starter: 225.2 IP; 3.22 FIP; .250 BAA; 1.15 WHIP; 1.95 B/9; 7.46 K/9; 0.48 HR/9; 53.1 GB%

    So, who are these two pretty awesome looking Minor League pitchers? None other than Ian Patrick Kennedy (“Player A”) and Zachary McAllister (“Player B”). In other words, all you IPK haters need to take a step back and realize the dude has only pitched 39.2 innings of bad baseball in the Majors in 2008. I say this because even though I’m sure all of us are big McAllister fans at this point, it still does not change the fact that Kennedy has not only been a better pitcher in the Minors against better competition (he’s amassed 152.2 innings at the Double-A and Triple-A levels that McAllister has yet to reach), but he’s already made it to the Major Leagues.

    So how about we give the kid a chance before declaring him the infamous ‘back-end starter of a N.L. West team’ based on 58.2 IP in the Majors.

    • Mike A. says:

      Stop your crazy talk. Ian Kennedy throws 90. McAllister throws 92.

    • Slugger27 says:

      totally agree… HOWEVER… though ive never been a big advocate of trading for peavy, it would be pretty hard to say no to a deal where ipk was the centerpiece

      that being said, completely agree we shouldnt judge IPK yet, but ive repeated why i still believe in IPK ad nauseum on here so im sure u all know my thinking… in a nutshell, the kid is damn talented

    • Ivan says:

      He’s also one the great USC pitchers in history. Ranked with the likes of Zito and Prior. But don’t tell anybody that.

    • Moose Returns! says:

      Dude, please do us a favor and never mention IPK minor league stats again – their completely irrelevant.

      There are about a hundred players in the Minors who have very good/great stats, that will never amount to anything in the Bigs (see Jeff Karstens). Just because IPK can strike out some 19 year old high school kids or over-aged lifetime Minor leaguers, doesnt mean that will amount to ML success.

      The proof is in the pudding – IPK absolutely sucked as a ML pitcher. He didnt scare anyone with his 89 MPH fastball and inconsistent breaking stuff. While that may fly in the Minors, it ain’t gonna cut it at the Bigs.

      Also, please note that I don’t criticize IPK based on his limited innings pitched, I base my critiques on his STUFF. He could pitch 20 shutout innings in the Bigs and I still wouldnt be floored cause you have to know, that sooner or later, major league hitters or going to adjust to the kind of stuff he’s throwing out there. And his stuff just isnt impressive. Sorry.

      • Matt M. says:

        igawa was our AAA pitcher of the year this year!!

        im not throwing in the towel on IPK
        but i think that if a peavy deal would occur, we’d be talking one of our hot positional prospects too

      • Ivan says:

        So guys like James Shields and Tom Glavine should never pick up a baseball.

        Let me ask you this, who’s a better pitcher James Shields or AJ Burnett?

      • Mike Pop says:

        I enjoyed this post but I disagree with it. (Moose Returns post)

      • The proof is in the pudding – IPK absolutely sucked as a ML pitcher.

        So did the overwhelming majority of all big league pitchers in their first 50 innings.

        • Mike A. says:

          Just for fun, over the first ~50 IP of their careers:

          Burnett: 46 H, 30 R, 33 BB, 41 K (in the NL)
          Sabathia: 59 H, 34 R, 32 BB, 34 K

          • Ivan says:

            I say it all the time, it’s gotten to the point where young pitchers are not allowed to struggle anymore.


            • Moose Returns! says:

              I feel like your all missing the point. Once again, the criticism of IPK is not based entirely on his putrid ML stats, but moreso his putrid stuff. I sware, the guy reminds me of a 2007 version of Mussina, only 20 years younger and with worse command.

              Maybe I’m just overly pessimistic, but I just really dont think IPK has what it takes. And to be honest, NO ONE REALLY DOES. While not positive, I’m pretty sure that Cashman was saying all along that IPK would be a nice middle-to-end of the rotation guy.

              If anything, we the fans, have created this monster wherein IPK was supposed to be looped in with Hughes and Joba, and thats just not the reality.

              • not really.

                i think the expectation from any fan who knew anything was that Kennedy’s ceiling was a middle rotation guy.

                no one who closely follows the team thought Kennedy was a top of the rotation guy.

                the APPEAL was that while his ceiling was lower, the probability was higher that he would get there. less ceiling, but less “bust” potential. he was supposed to be very polished and close to major league ready.

                unfortunately that wasn’t the case, as he struggled with his command in the majors.

              • Jamal G. says:

                No, you are looping intelligent, rational fans with fucking morons. Nobody in their right mind would ever say IPK has the ceiling of Joba Chamberlain or Phil Hughes. They were lumped together because of their contributions to the 2007 New York Yankees, not their respective talents. Intelligent folk are well aware that IPK’s ceiling is that of a middle-of-the-rotation starter. However, that in no way, shape or form should lend any credence to the notion that he is not a valuable asset to this organization.

                You do not build a rotation with five aces, it’s quite impossible that five pitchers with those ceilings ever realize their respective potentials. However, you do build a rotation with a mixture of those supreme talents and guys like Ian Kennedy or Zach McAllister: high-probability pitchers.

                • Moose Returns! says:

                  So IPK is a “high probability” pitcher now? Considering IPK went O for the season in wins and productive starts, I’m not really sure what that statement means. The only thing “probable” about IPK is that he’ll probably be pitching in the minors again next year.

                  And in regards to your diatribe about my “Big Three” comment, did anyone ever say that IPK had the “same ceiling” as Joba??? Apparently, you fall within the “un-intelligent” folk because your having great difficulty with reading comprehension. The point I was trying to make (which was obvious), was that we have created unreasonable expectations for IPK due to the hype of 2007. At no point did I reference that IPK and Joba/Hughes were equals; instead, I merely commented upon the fact that people continue to have difficulty acknowledging the fact that IPK is not what we hoped and the 2007 hype might have been overblown.

          • Jamal G. says:

            Idiotic fans’ comments in regards to CC Sabathia’s first 50 IP in the Majors:

            ZOMG!!111! This guy is fat, he doesn’t care about teh game!1! Why would we get some thug from California to pitch in the American League???????? ZOMG!11!1!1 This guy is too fat to be an effective pitcher!11 When he sees Victor Martinez put down one finger or two, he probably thinks Martinez is asking him if he wants a quarter-pounder with cheese or a Big Mac, instead of a Fastball or Curveball. ZOMG!1!1!11

          • Jack says:

            Just in case someone points out that they throw harder than Kennedy:

            Greg Maddux: 68 H, 35 R 21 BB, 33 K, 5.92 ERA

      • Chip says:

        If IPK’s minor league numbers are irrelevant based on “stuff”, then aren’t Mussina’s numbers last season irrelevant? For a guy posing under Moose Returns, saying IPK doesn’t have the stuff to pitch in the majors is kind of silly

        • Moose Returns! says:


          I’m assuming your smart enough to realize the difference b/w making the argument that a minor league picthers “stuff” wont cut it at the ML level, and a successful ML picther who likewise doesnt have great “stuff” – but has excellent command and velocity changes.

          p.s. pitchers like Mike Mussina (20 game winners with very great careers without overpowering or great “stuff”) are the exception, not the rule. So to make the analysis that IPK will end up like Moose since they have similar stuff, is “kind of silly.”

          • and it’s also “kind of silly” to assume Ian Kennedy, as a 23 year old pitcher, won’t improve his command and ability to change speeds.

          • Chip says:

            I never claimed that IPK will end up like Moose but I’m pointing out that it is entirely possible to succeed in the majors with what IPK has. Mussina was horrible in 2006 because he didn’t know how to pitch with diminished stuff which is exactly what happened to IPK in 2007. He has to take a page out of Moose’s book and go back to out-smarting hitters.

            There’s no way I expect IPK to win 20 games anytime soon but if he can put a solid 12 up a year, then he’s more valuable than Burnett who has flashes of brilliance but no consistency

          • All of this is wrong.

            A) Mike Mussina DID have great stuff. He no longer has great stuff, but coming up, he did have great stuff.

            B) You’re basically arguing in your first paragraph above that Ian Kennedy won’t make it at the big league level because he doesn’t have good enough “stuff”, while admitting that some minor league pitchers without good “stuff” still become successful big leaguers because they have, in your words, “excellent command and velocity changes”.

            Well, that’s IPK’s exact profile. He was a highly touted prospect then (and now) because he has excellent command over all his pitches and changes speeds effectively, keeping hitters off balance. That’s how he racked up those insane K/BB rates at every level.

            IPK’s main problem at the big league level, IMO, isn’t a lack of enough “stuff” or a lack of command. It’s a lack of confidence. He doesn’t yet trust his stuff, because these are good hitters who can tattoo him, so he’s nibbling. Happens to almost every young pitcher. Keep the faith, and he’ll improve. He’s a quality pitcher who can spot his pitches and be effective.

            • Chip says:

              Exactly, when you’re on the mound as a 23 year old facing Manny Ramirez, it’s hard to trust that you can strike him out so you start nibbling and put him on base, Then Ortiz comes up and you walk him as well because you don’t think you can get him. All of a sudden, they have you right where they want you and they have you not trusting that you can throw the perfect pitch. Give him time, he’ll come around

    • TurnTwo says:

      well, if his numbers are really that good, then maybe he can be a nice middle of the rotation arm for the Padres if they take him as a centerpiece for Peavy.

  15. Mike Pop says:

    Axelrod said they are willing to look at 6-8 more teams beyond Peavys preferred five.. This just keeps getting better

  16. Mike Pop says:

    Gammons is really ridiculous.. I mean he is a great writer and hall of fame guy and what not but really ? Like cmon man just stop with all the Yankees wont get anyone.. After a while its just too much.. Right when he releases his post of Peavy wont go to NY for any reason, Rosenthal says Yanks are in the running and could get him. Lol its funny but cmon Gammons stop talking out of your ass and just what you want

  17. Mike Pop says:

    O man Rosenthal compare Pedroia to Jeter ? Is it a fair comparison.. I guess it is right

  18. Mike Pop says:

    Im sorry if anyone gets mad cuz this is “off topic” but.. Who is the better player Grady or Beltran ?

  19. Mike Pop says:

    You guys see Pedroia’s interview ?

  20. Phil McCracken says:

    I guess I was wrong in the other Peavy topic when I said no deal would be possible without Hughes. My bad.

    Little scared that someone like Montero could go though. I’ve been impressed with his power thus far, even if its at Low A ball.

    • Chip says:

      There’s no way that Montero gets traded. Him, Hughes, A-Jax and Melancon are the next wave. If there’s one thing I’ve learned about Cashman, he never trades a player in a possition of need at the major league level. I’m concerned Romine might go though, I believe he’ll be behind the plate with Montero at first in 2012

      • Phil McCracken says:

        Yeah I’ve seen Montero in person. He’s not going to be a catcher. He’ll definitely be a 1B.

        • Jamal G. says:

          Again, he doesn’t need to be an average defender behind the plate, if he’s Victor Martinez, we’ll be happy (Montero actually has a gun, so the reports of his defense making great strides is quite encouraging).

          • Chip says:

            Agreed, Montero’s bat means he could be a very good first basemen but if he can hold down catcher, he could be one of the best with so much power. He’d probably destroy the single season homerun record by catchers (which is believe is 37 by Carlton Fisk?). My point is that Romine is still very, very good both defensively and with the bat so I think that he’d be the catcher while Montero (and his worse defense) ends up at first. Of course, trades and injuries could change that

        • TurnTwo says:

          and you cant just determine his position by size… if that were the case, Joe Mauer would never stay behind the plate, either.

      • Matt M. says:

        jose tabata says hello.

        the dude regressed in AA and maturity was a question…but if we defend hughes for his relatively young age still and potential growth, then the issue should have been similiar with tabata.

        now make up questions are very critical in NY and maybe he wouldnt have amounted to anything here…but trading him put an awful lot of eggs into our austin jackson basket to the point where you could now argue that jackson would be a more important asset to this organization’s future than hughes.

  21. Mulls says:

    at this point especially in a peavy deal isnt hughes more expendable than action jackson? with peavy wed have our rotation set. brackman and betances eta in about 18 months. where are we gonna get a young center fielder ? hughes romine edwar melky, if something like that gets you peavy you gotta do it.

    • at this point especially in a peavy deal isnt hughes more expendable than action jackson?

      No. We have other quality pitching prospects, and other quality pitchers. Jackson is our only quality outfield prospect, and we (arguably) have no quality outfielders.

      I’m not giving up Jackson for Peavy when we A) need Jackson badly and B) don’t need Peavy badly.

      Peavy for the next 5 years is a want. Jackson for the next 10 years is a need.

    • Chip says:

      Brackman and Betances are more like 2-3 years away with their messed up mechanics and high walk rates. Guys like that take a long time to get everything moving together.

      Problem is, Hughes could be everything Peavy is in a very short time. Peavy and Hughes’ age 21 seasons line up pretty closely. Hughes got hurt at 22 while Peavy struggled at 22 and got hurt during his breakout 23 year old season. Hughes could put it all together and dominate in the next season or two.

      So my question is, would you rather have Peavy for the next four seasons or have him from the beginning of his career? If the Yankees see Hughes developing into that (which I think they do) then it’s a no brainer

  22. kp says:

    Reality is that we have 3 potential starters. One, Wang – coming off a long injury. Two, Hughes – tremendous long-term potential, but probably will be nothing more than a #5 in 2009. Three, Joba – best case, limited innings; worse case, not the right make-up for a starter (personally, I like him better as the 7/8th inning set up man for the next two years and eventual replacement for Rivera).

    We need CC + 2 more. Meaning, if we can get Peavy without giving up Hughes and Jackson (potential future center fielder), we do it without question and go after AJ or Sheets for the final spot. I would think its possible since the Cubs and Braves seem to be out of the equation. Give up Kennedy, Melky, and another minor leaguer or two.

    Our line-up also needs some pop. Matsui and Posada are question marks at best and Giambi and Abreu have hit the highway. Sign Tex for $20 mil (and also get a gold glove at one of your two weakest positions). Give Gardner a shot at center until Jackson is ready. At least he has speed and can improve our defense. Pass on Cameron. Consider picking up a catcher as insurance for Posada. With the staff above, that should really be enough.

Leave a Reply

You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

If this is your first time commenting on River Ave. Blues, please review the RAB Commenter Guidelines. Login for commenting features. Register for RAB.