Rocco Baldelli

[beck72]

They could spin Anderson to the Marlins for even more pitching.

IMO, the only the Sox get Baldelli is if it's a 3 way deal with the DRays getting one of the young proven Marlins SP's that they like-- Josh Johnson, Nolasco or Olsen.

[southsideirish71]

Some time in the New Year I'm going to put together a little essay for everyone on 'Player Value' just so I don't have to read such things anymore.

 

Kalapse you need to get to the source of this. You need to contact Bill Gates and give him the idea of allowing Baseball America or some other source to rank a value system to the players on Xbox baseball games and keep the realistic trade option only on. That is the only way to get reality in peoples minds. Because remember, Johan Santana is only worth a Boone Logan because you can make that trade on the xbox.

 

Speaking of player value:

 

My favorite piece of radio insanity is when Matt Abatacolla and Jason Goff were upset because KW said Bmac was untradeable and that they can never trust KW again on his value of their system because they liked Danks more. Well Matt and Jason, prospects are for 2 things, either player development for a future roster member, or for trades for future roster members. If you tell everyone I soured on X player because of this, then how can you get value for that player.

[beck72]

FWIW, WSI has a thread on the Baldelli talk. A first time poster [yeah, I know, with "connections"] mentioned BA, Masset and Lance Broadway possibly being involved. Take it with a grain of salt. But something like that is probably worth it.

 

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbullet...2751&page=2

[SoxFan562004]

Speaking of player value:

 

My favorite piece of radio insanity is when Matt Abatacolla and Jason Goff were upset because KW said Bmac was untradeable and that they can never trust KW again on his value of their system because they liked Danks more. Well Matt and Jason, prospects are for 2 things, either player development for a future roster member, or for trades for future roster members. If you tell everyone I soured on X player because of this, then how can you get value for that player.

lol, great point. What did people expect KW to say "Yeah, we have looked at McCarthy again and we downgraded him, so now we are looking to trade him." Don't forget though, those two learn firsthand from Bernstein who has had some doozies in the past

[daa84]

This and Ozzie's silly contract that he negotiated and signed himself prove that athletes should just stick to being athletes and let agents negotiate their deals. Baldelli, like Ozzie, got hosed. Also, if a rapper (i.e. Master P) approaches you to handle your contract negotiations, just say "NO." He is the one that negotiated Ricky Williams' first contract with the Saints that basically would pay him market value if and only if he reached some unprecendented numbers for carries, yds, and TDs...all for a top 5 pick. WTF?

 

i remember when baldelli was signed by the devil rays....most people actually blasted the Drays, at the time he signed it he had only 1 year in the bigs and was out with an injury. nobody really knew why tampa, a team that never spends money, was locking up a guy who was injured and barely had any big league experience.....even given Baldelli's considerable potential.

 

I don't understand this Baldelli stuff, especially if Anderson is involved. While Baldelli is a solid all-around player, he has his own faults, including the proclivity to get injured, and his proneness to striking out.

 

Given our offense, I would have to be receiving a lot more of a sure thing to consider moving Brian and pitching prospects. Now if you want to discuss Crawford, that is one thing, but Baldelli? I'm not going out of my way to get him at this point.

 

Additionally, why would TB even want Anderson back? Isn't that the entire point of moving an OF? Because they have so many OF'ers?

 

As for the Baldelli's worth against crawfords....quite honestly....everyone will prefer crawford, but dont sell baldelli short by any means....they are a month apart in age, both project to be about .300 hitters with average to below average discipline (ie .340ish obp). Baldelli will probably be a 27 HR 20 steal guy, while Crawford a 20 HR 50 steal guy, rocco has a stronger arm and plays center regularly (at least when not hurt). To me its really not so cut and dry, cuz baldelli will hit 7-10 more homers, but steal 30 or so fewer bases, which to me is a pretty fair trade off. Baldelli is also signed for longer i believe. I'm not sayin i wouldnt rather have crawford (especially if we are talkin about leadoff hitters) but I think baldelli is closer in worth to crawford than most think....remember when rocco came up, espn said he could be the next joe dimaggio....even as ridiculous of a statement as that is, you know the guy has to have talent

 

really, the biggest difference in the two is health, where obviously i would prefer to have crawford

 

also: i know he hasnt accomplished much in the bigs but Baldelli did hit .305 with 16 homers in 92 games last year, and he is still only a little over a year older than Anderson. Do you guys see Anderson doing that over a 92 game stretch this year?

Edited December 29, 2006 by daa84

[Balta1701]

These are the Marlins, the same team that traded Derek Lee straight up for Choi.

We should not have to overpay for Baldelli. I would trade BA and a prospect that is not that promising for him.

Um, Baldelli plays for Tampa. The Marlins would have to be a 3rd team involved (and Hell, the Marlins would probably love to get Baldelli themselves, considering they are in real nead of a leadoff hitter).

[SoxFan562004]

These are the Marlins, the same team that traded Derek Lee straight up for Choi.

We should not have to overpay for Baldelli. I would trade BA and a prospect that is not that promising for him.

Lee was in a salary dump offseason for the Marlins if memory serves me correctly.

[Brian]

Um, Baldelli plays for Tampa. The Marlins would have to be a 3rd team involved (and Hell, the Marlins would probably love to get Baldelli themselves, considering they are in real nead of a leadoff hitter).

 

You're right. I f*cked that up. Brain Fart!

[shoota]

the drays always ask way too damn much for their players

 

Strongly agree.

[shoota]

Anderson might be better than Baldelli over the next 5 seasons.

 

This trade proposal sucks.

[beck72]

I would trade BA and a prospect that is not that promising for him.

If you were a GM and offered them that kind of deal, the D-rays would drop the phone in laughter and never take a phone call from you ever again

[hitlesswonder]

Anderson might be better than Baldelli over the next 5 seasons.

 

This trade proposal sucks.

 

Baldelli is a year older than Anderson. Baldelli is an .800 OPS CF with very good defense. Brian Anderson is a .650 OPS CF with good defense. I'm pretty sure Baldelli will be better than Anderson every year over the next 5 years. And I do expect Anderson to get better, but Baldelli would be a significant upgrade in my opinion.

[Balta1701]

Baldelli is a year older than Anderson. Baldelli is an .800 OPS CF with very good defense. Brian Anderson is a .650 OPS CF with good defense. I'm pretty sure Baldelli will be better than Anderson every year over the next 5 years. And I do expect Anderson to get better, but Baldelli would be a significant upgrade in my opinion.

You give Baldelli "very good defense" and only give Anderson "Good defense"?

[shoota]

Baldelli is a year older than Anderson. Baldelli is an .800 OPS CF with very good defense. Brian Anderson is a .650 OPS CF with good defense. I'm pretty sure Baldelli will be better than Anderson every year over the next 5 years. And I do expect Anderson to get better, but Baldelli would be a significant upgrade in my opinion.

 

Yeah, I can see Baldelli outperforming BA over the next 5 years.

 

I don't know anything about Baldelli's defense, so I can't compare him to BA. But if Baldelli is a better defender than BA, as you stated, he must be quite impressive.

Edited December 30, 2006 by shoota

[Flash Tizzle]

I don't want any pitching prospect traded this offseason. I don't care who's the player we'd receive in return. It's absolutely ridiculous to trade starting pitchers with the intention of stocking up on pitching prospects only to ship them off for a positional player.

 

Seriously, talk about a shortsighted move. We're unwilling to sign pitchers to long term deals and rarely develop pitchers within our system. Yet, when we FINALLY have several quality pitching prospects we're going to trade them for Baldelli? Idiotic. Now where are left when Buehrle leaves? If it takes two pitching prospects, I'd guess Gonzalez or Danks would be included. That's one less lefty we have to compensate for Buehlre or any of the other starters when they inevitably depart.

[hitlesswonder]

You give Baldelli "very good defense" and only give Anderson "Good defense"?

 

I accidently dropped a "very" when writing that -- I think Anderson's D is very good as well. From what I've seen they both looked good to me. I think Chris Dial's metrics had Anderson slightly better, but it was within the "margin of error".

 

Maybe someone who has seen more DRays games could post their impression of Baldelli in the field.

Edited December 30, 2006 by hitlesswonder

[knightni]

Baldelli in left, Anderson in center.. Pods off the bench, then Sweeney replacing Pods in 2008.

 

Makes sense.

Edited December 30, 2006 by knightni

[S720]

FWIW, WSI has a thread on the Baldelli talk. A first time poster [yeah, I know, with "connections"] mentioned BA, Masset and Lance Broadway possibly being involved. Take it with a grain of salt. But something like that is probably worth it.

 

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbullet...2751&page=2

 

No way in the world I would do this deal! Masset will be an outstanding reliever next year. Rocco does not worth two of our top pitching prospects AND Anderson. Hell NO, I will not do this deal at all. Anderson and Broadway are the most I'm willing to give up for Rocco.

[Heads22]

FWIW, WSI has a thread on the Baldelli talk. A first time poster [yeah, I know, with "connections"] mentioned BA, Masset and Lance Broadway possibly being involved. Take it with a grain of salt. But something like that is probably worth it.

 

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbullet...2751&page=2

 

 

That would be retarded. Why give up a gold-glove caliber CF, a first round pitcher pick who is in AAA plus a guy ready for the major league pen?

[beck72]

No way in the world I would do this deal! Masset will be an outstanding reliever next year. Rocco does not worth two of our top pitching prospects AND Anderson. Hell NO, I will not do this deal at all. Anderson and Broadway are the most I'm willing to give up for Rocco.

Masset probably wouldn't be involved--his upside for the sox is pretty high. Yet I could see TB wanting a guy who could close for them. I'm sure TB would want one of Masset or Aardsma.

 

Anyway, Anderson doesn't make sense for them

[beck72]

That would be retarded. Why give up a gold-glove caliber CF, a first round pitcher pick who is in AAA plus a guy ready for the major league pen?

I like Anderson more than most people around here. I think he showed something the way he battled back from his horrible start. Yet he doesn't have much trade value. His best value is on his "potential". If he has a poor 2007, that potential is gone. IMO, he's more valuable to the sox if they let him play in 2007 and build on his OK 2nd half. That would make the most sense, esp. if they believed BA could bounce back. For some reason though, the sox seem down on him. I don't want the sox to give him away. But if they essentially do that, it would show they wanted him gone for reasons besides just his poor hitting.

 

The biggest peices to me would be the pitchers involved.

[NorthSideSox72]

Baldelli in left, Anderson in center.. Pods off the bench, then Sweeney replacing Pods in 2008.

 

Makes sense.

Pretty much what I suggested, except, ship off Pods if we can. And Sweeney may have to replace Dye, unfortunately.

[YASNY]

Everybody seems to assume Dye will move on, but I haven't seen anything from him that says he wants out of Chicago. Sure, he said he'd like to play for the Ranger's new manager, but that doesn't mean we can't resign him.

[RME JICO]

Everybody seems to assume Dye will move on, but I haven't seen anything from him that says he wants out of Chicago. Sure, he said he'd like to play for the Ranger's new manager, but that doesn't mean we can't resign him.

I don't think everyone assumes Dye wants out of Chicago; I think it is more of a payroll/salary issue than anything else. If Dye has another solid year how much do you think he would command? and would the Sox be willing to pay him the years and money he wants? That is where the issue is.

[Balta1701]

Everybody seems to assume Dye will move on, but I haven't seen anything from him that says he wants out of Chicago. Sure, he said he'd like to play for the Ranger's new manager, but that doesn't mean we can't resign him.

The thing that makes everyone think we won't be able to sign Jermaine Dye isn't Dye wanting to leave, it's the .315/.385/.622, 120 RBI, 44 HR, and 0 stints on the disabled list. Dye's gone in 2 years from being a guy the Sox got on the cheap because everyone correctly thought he was a health risk to being one of the best bats in baseball. He won't get a 7 year contract like some of these guys, but there is nothing to stop him at all from getting Soriano-money for 4 or 5 years if he wants it (unless he gets hurt this year).

 

Edit: And it's not that the White Sox can't pay this amount, it's more a matter of they shouldn't pay that much. He's going to command what will be for a 33 year old outfielder who will be a DH in a year or two an absolute king's ransom if he even comes close to matching his 2006 numbers, so much that the Sox would put themselves in a bind by resigning him. Especially when Sweeney is still on the way up and should be in the big leagues full-time in 2008 barring a major setback.

Edited December 30, 2006 by Balta1701