3E8 Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(Jabroni @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 01:05 PM) If we traded for Chavez, Fields could move to 1st base and we could say goodbye to Paulsy. Field's defense at 3rd base isn't great anyways. Unless, of course, Fields was included in the trade for Chavez. From everything I've read, he won't start anywhere up here opening day '06. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(Jabroni @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 01:05 PM) If we traded for Chavez, Fields could move to 1st base and we could say goodbye to Paulsy. Field's defense at 3rd base isn't great anyways. Be nice if fields could hit in double a let alone start at first base ( big time offensive position) in the major leagues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 Why do we care what happens to Fields? I can't be positive, but I'm 99% sure that Chavez>>>>>>>>>Fields. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 I give this thread an under/over of 250 posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabroni Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 (edited) Be nice if fields could hit in double a let alone start at first base ( big time offensive position) in the major leagues. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm not saying he is going to pan out. He may or may not. But hell, I'd rather have Chavez at 3rd base and start Gload at 1st base next season, as long as we have Frank for another year. Paulsy is brutal. Edited June 1, 2005 by Jabroni Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 01:07 PM) Why do we care what happens to Fields? I can't be positive, but I'm 99% sure that Chavez>>>>>>>>>Fields. If he hits like he has been this season for the amount he is getting paid, fields>chavez. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 09:50 AM) The Nats are still very well in it though. And also, its their first season. They are more than likely not going to have a fire sale, no matter how far out they are. You don't not acquire a guy because you have a 1st round draft pick in AA that plays the same position you'd be acquiring. Especially when that hitter has really struggled this entire season. I'd deal Fields, Tracey, and Sweeney for Chavez and if they wanted one more I'd do that. Of course it would probably be more like Fields, Sweeney, and Bmac or something alon those lines. That or they'd want Anderson. I'd rather deal Sweeney as opposed to Anderson, but I'd deal either. However they can't get Anderson and Bmac in the same package, imo. Bottomline, the Sox have a ton of prospects they could deal and definatley have the pieces to make this type of trade and than go from there. It would likely indicate that this is Paulies final season or at least one of Paulie/Thomas would be gone. This move makes a ton of sense, imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 01:08 PM) If he hits like he has been this season for the amount he is getting paid, fields>chavez. I'm sure he'll come out of it. There are a bunch of reason to believe he will, but you know that just as well as I do, so I'm not getting into an argument for the sake of arguing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 12:07 PM) Why do we care what happens to Fields? I can't be positive, but I'm 99% sure that Chavez>>>>>>>>>Fields. My sentiments exactly, I think the Chavez>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Konerko so I think if we could swing something for Chavez, dont re-sign Kong, I dont give a s*** who plays first cause we will have a MUCH improved offense as is without Crede and with Chavez. His 280 30+hr's and 100 rbi's may improve in our bandbox stadium anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 How much of Chavez's contract do you think the A's will eat. The more they are willing to take, the better the prospects. SB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox-r-us Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 One reason we HAVE to get rid of Crede some time in the near future.... http://www.suntimes.com/output/sox/cst-spt-ssep01.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(sox-r-us @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 12:23 PM) One reason we HAVE to get rid of Crede some time in the near future.... http://www.suntimes.com/output/sox/cst-spt-ssep01.html oh, he will definatley NOT be re-signed for sure. Nobody wants to deal with that ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankensteiner Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(GreatScott82 @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 12:38 PM) On with Boers and Bernstien explained why he is struggling this year and explained his team's struggles. Says if the A's keep losing- Beane will likely trade him to a contender. He says that there is no way (with his large contract) that he will be there when they are doing a rebuilding process. He said "I signed this deal knowing i will be on a contending team, and once the A's become a non-contending team I expects to be dealt to a contender." He also said Beane might wait a year to see if he can fix things for 2006 before he thinks about dealing Chavez. Kind of an interesting interview. Who knows what to expect with this situation... Can someone explain to me why B&B would be interviewing Eric Chavez? They usually interview players from the local teams or from teams currently playing the local ones. Seems a little strange to me. Also, for those that heard the interview, I'm curious as to what reasons he gave for his struggles? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 10:19 AM) How much of Chavez's contract do you think the A's will eat. The more they are willing to take, the better the prospects. SB None, maybe the Sox could get them to take Vizcaino or something along those lines (but thats not much). The A's aren't going to eat the contract and to be honest they don't really have to. Now if you wanted to deal Dye back to them, sure, they'd probably accept that, but I don't think the Sox will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shagar69 Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 i would love to have chavez but it def. depends on who beane wants. if he wants Bmac, and 2 decent prospects plus Crede, ill take it. But it he start askin for Anderson, Sweeney, Gio, or Young in addition to Bmac, i would rather just get a decent stopgap 3b like polanco, randa, castilla, whomever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 10:50 AM) The Nats are still very well in it though. And also, its their first season. They are more than likely not going to have a fire sale, no matter how far out they are. The Nats are not only in it, they're exactly 1.5 games back of the 1st place Braves and Marlins. And on top of that...guess what they've been struggling with? I'll give you a hint...we're in the same boat. There was like a 10 game stretch in a row over the last 2 weeks where the Nats scored less than 3 runs each game. The simple fact is that team will not be holding a fire sale, especially not their first year in existence, especially not on their offense, especially when they have a chance to make a run at the division, and especially when the thing holding them back from making a run at their division is their offense. No one should mention Vinny Castilla here again unless the Nats go into a major slump. That should be the end of the discussion. We might as well start talking about Rolen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(Jabroni @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 01:05 PM) If we traded for Chavez, Fields could move to 1st base and we could say goodbye to Paulsy. QUOTE(Jabroni @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 01:08 PM) Paulsy is brutal. Konerko -- .223/.336/.462, 13HR Fields -- .213/.292/.320, 4 HR @ AA That seems like an upgrade... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(Soxbadger @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 01:19 PM) How much of Chavez's contract do you think the A's will eat. The more they are willing to take, the better the prospects. SB Not a dime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 10:29 AM) Konerko -- .223/.336/.462, 13HR Fields -- .213/.292/.320, 4 HR @ AA That seems like an upgrade... But you forget that Fields numbers will improve going from the pitchesr park in Bham to the hitters park in Chicago. No one should even mentions Fields name at this point as the future 3rd baseman. He isn't producing and until he starts producing he isn't an option and should be an aftersite, not a foresite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kev211 Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 If the A's dont eat up any of his contract can the sox even afford him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seesox Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 Not a dime. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I bet you anything that if we made a trade with them and asked them to pay exactly one dime of his contract they would agree.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kev211 Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilJester99 Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 I don't think the contract will be that bad because Paulie won't be on the books after this season or if they trade him b4 then, I would really like to see Chavez on the Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabroni Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 Konerko -- .223/.336/.462, 13HR Fields -- .213/.292/.320, 4 HR @ AA That seems like an upgrade... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I also said that I wouldn't mind starting Gload at 1st base next season if we traded for Chavez and kept Frank for one more year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 1, 2005 Share Posted June 1, 2005 QUOTE(ScottPodRulez22 @ Jun 1, 2005 -> 01:32 PM) If the A's dont eat up any of his contract can the sox even afford him? Yes. We would let Paul Konerko walk away barring a WS apprearence giving us a ton of new payroll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.5399aa0ece6cd8c6bcb5fe1411a65e7c.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.