Chisoxfn

QUOTE(South Side Fireworks Man @ Jun 13, 2007 -> 09:10 PM) Right now one of the last guys the Sox should give up is Garland, although no one is untouchable. I think the perfect scenario is getting Thome to agree to a deal, getting some two upper echelon prospects for him, plus one good prospect (all being guys that are on the cusp to major league ready) and than building a team around younger position players, Konerko, AJP (possibly), a FA outfielder (plus likely a trade pickup via the OF) and a rotation of Vazquez/Garland/Buehrle/Danks (plus one guy and that is still a pretty damn good rotation, imo). Moving Dye and Iguchi as well and maybe even Uribe. And I'm not overly concerned with losing Thome, simply because I think this team could find some solid bats (no one near as good as Thome) but I'll take quality bats throughout the lineup, extra speed, and an improved defense (plus the idea of having a legit top of the order, hoepfully a bullpen laced with youngsters and vets and a strong rotation). QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jun 13, 2007 -> 09:10 PM) If we are rebuilding, and I mean really rebuilding, Kids can play mode, then it makes no sense at all to hold onto Jim Thome for 2 more years, especially with what he could bring back. But the big question would be...would Jim do it? That is the thing, would Jim be willing to just stay in Chicago and no he may not ever make the playoffs again or would he be okay with a move as long as it took him to a place he'd be happy (and I think you should be careful and at least try). Thome is going to continue to get hurt yet he still has amazing value...I say do it.

The Guys are back and this week they are absolutely positive the club should concede and start making trades. So check out the show as Gage & Scalise evaluate the guys the club could move, the ones that they should move, and the type of deals they would be fans of. http://www.soxtalk.com/podcasts/june14.mp3

QUOTE(Fantl916 @ Jun 13, 2007 -> 08:29 PM) he has a full no-trade clause... and the only reason he agreed to come here was because he is from here. i know some guys want to win championships, but KW would have to do an amazing sales job on Thome to get him to consider it. its nice in theory, but i doubt its happening Ya, I'm thinking the odds are anywhere from 1-5% but the fact of the matter is there probably isn't a better trade the Sox can make than one involving Thome and the Angels.

What if the Sox were able to get Thome to agree to a trade. Thome probably has a dream to win a world series championship and if Ken Williams came to Thome and basically told him that the Sox were going to be retooling to hopefully compete next year (but he couldn't honestly give that guarantee based on the number of question-marks) and eventually got Thome to agree. Wouldn't he be the absolute perfect guy to move. You could essentially move Thome to the Angels (who would probably at that point give up Brandon Wood and someone else or Howie Kendrick and someone else or Kendry Morales, Mathis/Napoli, Aybar, & Figgins and really load up on good prospects. And don't tell me the Angels wouldn't pounce on Thome. He's a character guy that would be the perfect protection for Vladdy and would pretty much assure them great odds of being in the series (with there pitching). Basically put, moving Thome would give the Sox the ability to load up without moving Buehrle (who is the best trade chip, albeit LAA would be so desperate for a guy like Thome he could in fact turn into the best chip). Corner a Thome deal with a Dye deal (again landing you at least one upper echelon prospect; maybe a Betemeit/Billingsley deal (meaning you could have an infield with Wood at SS, Betemeit at 2b or whatever; hell maybe you can get Ethier somehow, but without getting Billingsley), and than a Jose Contreras deal (I still think you can get some decent guys for him, but obviously no #1 prospects) plus Tadahito Iguchi and you are now talking about completely retooling your team while still having a rotation of Garland/Buehrle/Vazquez/Danks (with tons of chips to fill in for the 5th starters spot and those that don't win that job sliding to the pen). You'd also have freed up the money to extend Garland, resign Buehrle, and go hard after a position player.

QUOTE(daa84 @ Jun 13, 2007 -> 08:11 PM) i think they could maybe get kenendy and cabrera, but certainly not both and cano..... With Buehrle...put a gun to GM's heads, he will be the best pitcher on the trade market.

I was doing some thinking and its pretty obvious the Yankees would absolutely love the idea of Mark Buehrle. It is also obvious that they won't give up a guy like Phillip Hughes. However, they do have some other guys that could fill some needs on the south side of Chicago. I should also point out that to trade Buehrle, the Sox should get two young starters plus a upper echelon prospect. After thinking through things, the Yanks have two young starters named Melky Cabrera and Robinson Cano. I realize Cano is a bit over-rated, however, he hits for good power, plays a solid d (not great but he's better than Guchi and has improved a bit since his rookie season) and can hit for an average. Cabrera is also a bit over-rated, but he had a pretty damn solid rookie year. He will never hit for a ton of power, probably won't be an all star, but he should be a pretty steady .280-.290 with a .350 to .360 OBP all while playing pretty darn good defense with a real strong arm (plus he's young). Those two guys would be immediate starters in Chicago filling two serious need positions. The Sox would also include Tadahito Iguchi in this deal, so the Yanks can replace Cano temporarily. That brings us to the upper echelon prospect...Ian Kennedy. He was a stud at USC, a #1 selection in last years draft and has been absolutely dominant in the minors so far. I'm sure the Yanks would whine about it, but if the Sox deal Buehrle they have to get a high impact arm and Kennedy is that guy (he also has the ability to be a quick mover and be at the major league level sooner rather than later). Obviously I prefer to keep Buehrle and move Contreras (if you can get him to waive his no trade) but if not, I think this would be a pretty solid deal. Mix this with a deal with the Dodgers involving a pitcher plus Dye (maybe MacDougall or if they wanted Contreras and could get him to bite on a deal you could turn this into a bigger package) that gets you Ethier and hopefully Billingsley (maybe Loney or whomever else). You now have added a couple top notch pitching prospects, filled in your outfield with two young outfielders (plus you have Sweeney developing and obviously the ability to sign a guy like Ichiro or try to pick up a power bat because the lineup would obviously need some pop from somewhere) and gotten younger at 2b. LF - Ethier (or RF) CF - Cabrera RF - ??? (You could go with less power and try to land Ichiro or try to trade or sign a power bat) Sweeney would also get ab's and compete (but I fully think you should quite a few outfield options) 3B Fields and Crede SS - ??? 2B - Cano 1B - Konerko C - AJP DH - Thome (unless you can trade him). Definitely lacks a bit of pop, but you now have the money to go hard after an outfielder and try to move Uribe or whomever to upgrade at SS. Rotation: Garland Vazquez Danks Combo of: Kennedy/Gio/Floyd/Billingsley Worse Case: You use some of these guys to trade for an extra pitcher This doesn't factor in what you could get for Contreras, plus I think the Sox would than look to add in other areas (utilizing guys like Broadway).

QUOTE(kwolf68 @ Jun 13, 2007 -> 02:39 PM) I've seen several lists that are very current...about half of them have the Cards above the Sox, and half below. The White Sox minor league system is now safely among the 6 or 7 worst as is the Cardinals. Those lists are flat wrong. The system has really gotten a lot better as new guys have stepped up (Russell, Egbert, Gio, Floyd (if you count him a prospect), De Los Santos, Carter, Getz, etc).

Gotcha...so what type of price should I be looking at spending (I can get 50% back from my employer up to them giving me 500 bucks, meaning I could get a 1k bike and pay 500, however I don't think I want to spend that much on a bike). I should note I plan on doing a lot of my riding on the roads, while camping a couple times a year and at those points I'll do some terrain type of riding.

QUOTE(kwolf68 @ Jun 13, 2007 -> 01:42 PM) I'm not so much myself, but he scores out as one of their top 3 pitching prospects. In short, I don't think the Cards minor leagues is in any better shape than our own. Putting a deal together with St.Louis will be tough...if they had the Angels or Dodgers minor league system no doubt we could get something done, because the minor league depth of the two LA teams is amazing and they could easily part with elite prospects to bring in a stud like Mark B. It is way worse.

He'd be an amazing acquisition, but there is no way this club is going to pick him up. Unless of course they are interested in Gio and multiple other guys (or we can get a third team involved that gets Dye and more prospects go or maybe someone like Buehlre). I do agree, I'd give up a boatload for him.

Not interested in Reyes.

Yes...we should ask the farm, Buehrle is that freaking good.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jun 12, 2007 -> 07:26 PM) AJ is a pain in the ass. Nothing worse. Dukes is a garbage human being. No thanks. His closest comparables -- oh, Barrett, Everett, Sheffield -- are nowhere near as bad as he is. Elijah Dukes is his own special monster. Carl Everett does not deserve to be up there.

The key is to move Contreras and get him to agree to waiving his no trade clause. I think teams would have interest in him. He's had a couple rough outings but the end result is he still has a relatively decent ERA while pitching in a hitters league and in a hitters park. I think you could get some talent for him, clear up some payroll and get another young arm up here to be able to better evaluate whether that young arm is capable of being considered part of the rotation in the future.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Jun 13, 2007 -> 10:48 AM) I hate the Philly Phanatic. In fact, I am not very happy about mascots in general. I think they take away from the game on the field. One of the worst incidents was perpetrated by the Phillie Phanatic. The Dodgers were in town to play the Phillies and somehow, it got ahold of one of my jerseys. It took the jersey, put it on a dummy and ran over the dummy again and again. That type of a display should not be shown in ballparks, especially in front of children. It exhibits violence and disrespect. I pulled the Phanatic aside and said, “Why don’t you run over a dummy with a Phillies jersey?” I called the front office of the Phillies and told them how I felt. They can play with kids in the stands, but running over the dummy was simply wrong, and that kids would get the wrong impression. Apparently, they didn’t care. The next time we were in Philadelphia, I confronted the Phanatic. I told it not to use my jersey anymore, and so the next time he did, I was forced to act. I went right up to it and body slammed it to the turf. I often wondered how it got my jersey, and then I found out how. Steve Sax would give it the jerseys because my players thought it was a funny thing to do. Are those comments by Lasorda or something? I'm confused.

I'm going to get a new mountain bike (mine is absolutely thrashed and trashed...I've probably had it for 10 years) and I was going to see if anyone here has any recommendations. I'm not necessarily looking to break the bank, but I definitely want a good bike with shocks and all that jazz so when I go up into the mountains and ride trails it will be relatively comfortable (I also will ride on the street as well). I was looking at Costco and I found this one (my work pays for half of it too which is cool): http://www.costco.com/Browse/Product.aspx?...&lang=en-US

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jun 13, 2007 -> 09:40 AM) I'd do that Dodgers deal in a god damn heartbeat but Ned Colletti would hang up half way through the word Contreras. I agree, the Dodgers just don't have any interest in acquiring starting pitching. Dye is the guy the Dodgers would be very very interested in.

If you deal with the Yanks, you go for Melky and two projectable arms unless of course you get them to bite on giving up Phillip Hughes.

All I can say is wow.

I for one am glad Reynolds is back. I miss him and Kruky together on baseball tonight.

QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Jun 12, 2007 -> 06:22 PM) Buehrle>Verlander Career wise yes...but upside wise I'd say no. I Freaking love watching Verlander pitch, especially now that his slider is getting even sicker and his changeup is getting a lot better. The guy is flat nasty. QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Jun 12, 2007 -> 08:54 PM) Nope -- you only forfeit it if the pick is #16 or lower (ie 16-30). We might lose our second rounder, but not our first. Edit: Nevermind, mis-read your pick and your right, this club is likely going to be selecting top 10 unless it makes some serious changes.

Happy Birthday to one of the FutureSox guns....too bad he didn't get to celebrate a little early by seeing his team play in a super. Hope it was a good one buddy

Noon Central time right? Sweet, I'm going to watch some of this one.

QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Jun 12, 2007 -> 05:35 PM) Can you explain to me what "signability issues" means? Signability typically relates to high school seniors or collegiate juniors as both have leverage. A collegiate junior can be asking for a huge sum of money (higher than the slot money) and he has some leverage as he could opt to go back to school and hope to improve his draft status (so essentially he can put a gun to the team head to step up the offer or he stays in school). In the case of a high school player, signability typically relates to guys with high potential that either have high salary demands (ie well over 6 figures to sign) or strong commitments to college. In this case teams may shy away in the early rounds because they figure if they were to draft the guy that it is going to take a bloody ransom to sign them so at that point they continue to fall and fall and if a team wants to take a chance on him they know they are going to do so having to give the guy way more than slot money (still close to the couple million he is probably asking for). Sometimes a team will take these sort of guys in the 10 or 20th round (Sox took BA' 66 or 67 rated prospect right around the 22nd round in this years draft and also did something similar when they took John Danks brother) and than try to make a serious offer (giving them top 2 round money). Danks brother was a guy that turned down a pretty good offer from the Sox because he wanted to stay in school. However, more vaguely speaking, signability would relate to any player that has serious salary demands. So say one highly touted first round pick is repped by Boras and is asking for an 6-8 million bonus (maybe he's rated #1 on your teams draft board) but another prospect is likely to sign for a 2-3 million bonus (maybe this guy is rated #4 on your draft board) than your team may go with the guy that is the easy sign and save the money. An example of this is when the Brewers opted to draft LaPorta, whose an incredibly talented bat but he also is considered an easier sign because he's a college senior with no leverage who wasn't quite projected to go as early as he did. Hopefully that helps a bit, even though my explanation was kind of all over the place.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseacti...deoid=741851440