Jump to content

Can Tejada be a reality?


rangercal
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 396
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE(Damen @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 11:54 AM)
So you believe that a team with this rotation

 

Buerhle

Garland

Garcia

Vazquez

McCarthy

 

and a lineup with Tejada/Konerko/Thome at the heart is worse off?

Well, we wouldnt have a clear cut #1 pitcher anymore.

 

But I wasnt saying that the lineup wouldnt be better, because it probably would be. I was just replying to you calling Contreras replaceable, which isnt really true. We wouldnt be able to fill his spot in the rotation with someone of a similar caliber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Andy the Clown,

 

Thanks for the info to get things stirring on the board. One question not related to the Tejada discussion: In you sig, you say you have "waited 37 years for this" (so I assume you are at least 37 years old) and then you say "if the Bears make the Superbowl..." So weren't you around in 1985-86 when the Bears not only made but won the Superbowl?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(heirdog @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 11:58 AM)
Andy the Clown,

 

Thanks for the info to get things stirring on the board.  One question not related to the Tejada discussion:  In you sig, you say you have "waited 37 years for this" (so I assume you are at least 37 years old) and then you say "if the Bears make the Superbowl..."  So weren't you around in 1985-86 when the Bears not only made but won the Superbowl?

I saw that too and wondered the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Felix @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 11:58 AM)
Ever heard of a guy named Mark Buehrle?  He's prettty good.

No one's a bigger Buehrle fan than me. But he wasnt nearly the pitcher Contreras was in the second half last year, not to mention the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 05:57 PM)
Some of you guys don't realize how lucky we were avoiding injuries in '05.

 

I also think we were lucky to win as many games as we did with our offense last season. I know we've added Thome, but we still have quite a few hitters that can easily bat in the 240-250 range next year. I know it won't happen, but I'm confident in saying we'd all have no problem losing Uribe after seeing what Tejada can produce for the Sox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(heirdog @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 12:58 PM)
Andy the Clown,

 

Thanks for the info to get things stirring on the board.  One question not related to the Tejada discussion:  In you sig, you say you have "waited 37 years for this" (so I assume you are at least 37 years old) and then you say "if the Bears make the Superbowl..."  So weren't you around in 1985-86 when the Bears not only made but won the Superbowl?

 

Are you saying now that the Sox have won it, you're not going to follow them anymore?

 

Is it criminal to want your team to win multiple championships?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(sayitaintso @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 11:56 AM)
Then you are short one pitching spot in the pen since BMac moves to the rotation.

 

 

Considering that pitchers spot was Vizcaino's last year, who gained a majority of his innings in mop up work, I'm confident we can fill that spot in spring training and the increase in offense Tejada provides will more than make up for it.

 

I can see the argument that this may not be the best trade for us long term, in terms of shoring up salary space. But I can't understand for the life of me how anyone could think this trade wouldn't vastly improve us in 2006.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Adam G @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 01:00 PM)
No one's a bigger Buehrle fan than me.  But he wasnt nearly the pitcher Contreras was in the second half last year, not to mention the playoffs.

Personally, I'd take someone who is consistantly good over someone that is only good one half of the year anyday of the week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 01:01 PM)
I also think we were lucky to win as many games as we did with our offense last season.  I know we've added Thome, but we still have quite a few hitters that can easily bat in the 240-250 range next year.  I know it won't happen, but I'm confident in saying we'd all have no problem losing Uribe after seeing what Tejada can produce for the Sox.

 

Are you confident that our pitchers won't get hurt in '06? Who comes in for a start, if Count was traded and we need 3 or 4 starts in a month?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(whitesoxin' @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 10:21 AM)
Now I know an offer of Contreras, Uribe, and possibly a prospect sounds like it won't be enough, but I'm thinking it just might be enough. Here is why: Jose Contreras had a monster second half and continued to dominate in the playoffs. That is what the Orioles remember the most. Juan Uribe had one of the most amazing defensive performances ever in Game Four of the WS. This is what the Orioles remember.

 

I'll say it again: The Orioles won't want Contreras unless they're contending right now. Since they lost Palmiero, Sammy, and Ponson, I think it's fair to say that they're not making a run for it this year. Only teams that are in a position to win right now would be interested in Contreras.

 

The Orioles will want McCarthy, Garland, or Buehrle in any deal that involves Tejada. If I were KW, I'd immediately say "no" to the latter two. I might be willing to trade McCarthy if the Sox are struggling at the plate in July.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Damen @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 12:02 PM)
Considering that pitchers spot was Vizcaino's last year, who gained a majority of his innings in mop up work, I'm confident we can fill that spot in spring training and the increase in offense Tejada provides will more than make up for it.

 

I can see the argument that this may not be the best trade for us long term, in terms of shoring up salary space.  But I can't understand for the life of me how anyone could think this trade wouldn't vastly improve us in 2006.

The trade would improve our offense but weaken the pitching staff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Adam G @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 11:57 AM)
Well, we wouldnt have a clear cut #1 pitcher anymore.

 

But I wasnt saying that the lineup wouldnt be better, because it probably would be.  I was just replying to you calling Contreras replaceable, which isnt really true.  We wouldnt be able to fill his spot in the rotation with someone of a similar caliber.

 

I called Contreras replaceable not because I think McCarthy will be able to mirror his numbers, but because the increase in offensive prowess this provides, along with a guy like McCarthy to take over the fifth spot will make up for the loss.

 

And I really don't think having to settle for Buerhle as a number one again is going to hurt us too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Felix @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 12:02 PM)
Personally, I'd take someone who is consistantly good over someone that is only good one half of the year anyday of the week.

Buehrle didnt really have a stellar second half last year. He was the odds on favorite for the Cy Young at the break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was all for Jon and Uribe for Tejada I would have packed Juan's and Jon's bags if necessary but I hate the idea of trading Contreras even for a Tejada. JC needs to stay on this team, you just can't trade a pitcher that could and will be(imo) one of the best in baseball this upcoming season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Damen @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 01:02 PM)
I can see the argument that this may not be the best trade for us long term, in terms of shoring up salary space.  But I can't understand for the life of me how anyone could think this trade wouldn't vastly improve us in 2006.

I think its mainly the lack of pitching depth. Our strength is the pitcher. We tried having a team based around power for years, and it didn't work out. Now, with a team based around pitching, defense, and the timely hit, we won a World Series. Pitching depth in this league is very valuable in this league.. I'd rather hold onto it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Felix @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 12:06 PM)
I think its mainly the lack of pitching depth.  Our strength is the pitcher.  We tried having a team based around power for years, and it didn't work out.  Now, with a team based around pitching, defense, and the timely hit, we won a World Series.  Pitching depth in this league is very valuable in this league.. I'd rather hold onto it.

All Damen has to do is look back at the years 2004-2001 to see this point.

Edited by sayitaintso
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 12:53 PM)
Well, I have already said why in a lengthy post. But I think Uribe and Contreras have higher value than Tejada IMO.  If we had unlimited budget, then yes he is a good fit.  But I really like Uribe's talent, his youth, and his contract.  Because he have to resign some EXPENSIVE pitchers in a couple of year, and uribe's contract will allow that, Tejadas wont.

 

They would have a higher value IF Contreras was signed long term. As you know, this is his walk year. If you think sandwich draft picks are enough compensation for him, you keep him.

 

As to Uribe, I agree. His contract and defense are his biggest pluses. FYI: Uribe is only

 

The resigning of Buerhle, Garcia and Garland over the next three years will have nothing to do with Uribe's contract. Openings in RF (Dye), 3b (Crede) will free up money if KW decides to resign these players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Dec 30, 2005 -> 02:01 PM)
Are you saying now that the Sox have won it, you're not going to follow them anymore?

 

Is it criminal to want your team to win multiple championships?

 

Umm, no. But the sig says: "If the Bears make the Super Bowl, I will have seen it all." So in essence the quote can be interpretted that he has not seen the Bears make the Super Bowl and would like to see that before he is done either with life or with sports. In reality, he has to have seen it all but would like to see MORE.

 

Hope that clears up what I was asking...as it seemed pretty clear to me when I asked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...