Chisoxfn

QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 03:24 PM) Does anyone else realize the ridiculousness of this "proposed" trade? There have been a couple of posts about how successful Freddy has been pitching in Anaheim, but then look at Santana's home numbers. Over the next 5 years, chances are Santana will win more games than Freddy and get paid a few lifetime's worth of money less, couple with the fact that Garcia could walk after 1 season, but Santana is still under the club's control for another 4 or 5. If the deal really is Santana + for Garcia, KW would have jumped at it so fast before the Angels could change their minds. For whatever reason the Angels have offered Santana in a lot of trade packages. I think they want to win now and right now they really need that top of the rotation guy. Freddy has been that in the past and I (and I'm sure if the Angels made the deal they would too) think he can be it again. You put Freddy with a horse like Lackey and if they get Colon back (another potential horse, although I wouldn't count on it) mix that with Weaver and obviously they have Saunders (who looks pretty good) mixed with Escobar and thats pretty nasty (being that Sanders would replace Colon if Colon was hurt). I can definately see it making sense. You can only have so many young guys in your rotation and win pennants (imo) and they will likely have Sanders/Weaver already in there. Plus the Angels can spend the money to resign Freddy if they want.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 02:45 PM) Iowa isn't going to be as bad as people think this year, but they won't be anything special. If all goes right they slide into the tourney. If it doesn't we go NIT. I can't see anything worse. They have some talent and have some really good recruiting classes on the way (or at least what look to be real good recruiting classes).

LOL @ ISU

QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 12:25 PM) 1,000 Xbox 360's are going to be sold for $99 through Amazon.com on Thanksgiving... When and where. Is there a set time this is going to start? Cause I'm all over this.

Mathis is a superior all around prospect to Napoli. Napoli is solid but not near as hyped as he was. That said I think he's a good all around catcher, but Mathis has the chance to be one of the better backstops in the game. Oh and I'd be all over Molina. He's just another version of Henry Blanco, except he's better with the stick.

Sorry, I'm at work and just got back from a meeting. Is the speculatoin that we would get Santana and Figgins for Garica? If so where the heck do a sign. I'd run all the way home screaming like a little girl if this were to happen. If not, is it something like the Sox throwing in a Fields or Anderson (or both cause I could accept both) for the deal to happen? Both Fields and Anderson fill serious needs for the Angels. QUOTE(YASNY @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 10:21 AM) You make some legitimate points. But I'm not at all enamored with Figgens. I just don't think he's that much better when we are talking trading one of starters and consider Figgens as a difference maker vs. Pods. He's better, yes. But not 'worth the upgrade' in my opinion. Its not even close, Figgins is exponentially better than Pods. Pods is garbage in the field and has no idea to handle the bat and has lost his best asset (a legit basestealer). Figgins on the other hand is young, coming off a down year (yes I know) but can bunt and handle a bat (is also a switch hitter) and if you give him one position he will be the premiere left fielder in baseball or an above average centerfielder who WILL GET BETTER. Not to mention he's an elite base stealer, definately one of the three best in the game. Its an absolute no brainer to acquire Figgins if we have the chance. Garcia/Fields/Anderson for Figgins/Santana.

By the way, in no way do I see us getting Michael Young in this deal but I thought I'd throw it out anyway and I'd have zero problem with Hurley/Danks/Arias all in the same package. At least we'd be getting two front line pitching prospects.

QUOTE(Jimbo @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 02:55 PM) speculation...it is bruce levine I was both giddy and scared at the same time. If they got Hurley plus Michael Young I'd be happy. If we got Hurley and Danks and another prospect like Volquez (or however you pronounce it) I wouldn't have a problem either since it would open the spot for Bmac (even though it wouldn't have been the spot I suspected) while at the same time giving us a boatload of near MLB ready top flight prospects (which we could than keep one of and trade the others or do any combination of the two).

QUOTE(fathom @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 12:32 PM) I'm just saying what I heard....Hill's finish last year has raised his stock a ton again. I think it's safe to say that 2007 is a huge year for both of them though. If I had to choose one of them to be on my team, I'm not sure who I would take. From what I know there aren't many guys with the value on the trade market as Bmac. And no Rich Hill isn't even close to being one of them. Right now McCarthy has more value than Earvin Santana (don't ask me why either).

As in we just traded him to the Rangers? Cripes two of my absolute favorites gone in one day? Is this a done deal or just speculation as of this point.

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 02:44 PM) If Coop can 'fix' Aardsma, this is also a very nice insurance policy if Mac has to spend some time on the DL at some point. If, you mean when Mac spends time on the DL. That alone is why I don't want us to have Haeger in our pen. I'd rather have Haeger pitching every 5 days ready in case a starter goes down.

One thing about Aardsma is that he has a darn good arm and he was pitching pretty well for the Cubs down the stretch. This guy was a legit top notch pick with a top notch arm and I have no problem acquiring him. I think its a good move for the Cubs because Cotts gets to go to a league that hasn't adjusted to his sneaky fastball. I still like Neal a lot (one of his biggest propenents) and I would not be shocked if he came out and dominated again next year but without any quality secondary pitches its going to be rough. If we got a quality lefty in this Vazquez guy, this deal isn't so bad. In fact it could be good considering we have a guy that is cheap and under our control for a while and could turn into a front line set up guy (I'm a big Aardsma fan).

QUOTE(aboz56 @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 10:11 AM) Boone, lol, don't get me started. I'd be surprised if he wasn't on the opening day roster. He has a nice arm and when he throws strikes he's pretty tough to hit.

QUOTE(fathom @ Nov 15, 2006 -> 11:11 AM) And I think it will be to the White Sox. The question I have is if he can be our starting CF or LF next year? I'll pass on that. He's ridiculously over-rated.

Sounds pretty cool. Hopefully you all get a ton of can's donated.

I don't know enough about this prospect to really say. Sometimes its not wise to just look at the guy's splits. If he's a toolsy guy who is coming off a bad year or rebounding from something it could still be a valuable move. I'm probably the person on here who has some of the most reasonable expectations when it comes to BA, but I sure as heck am not against moving him if we plan to upgrade CF some other way. Also, if Ozzie has said he doesn't like him and he's not going to use I'd move him now anyway before his value is really shot. I prefer Sweeney to Anderson anyway (even though Anderson is a top notch CF). I have no problem if we keep BA but I've long said to do that we need to have Ozzie willing to stick him in CF for good and we'd also need to upgrade SS/LF and have a very good pitching staff.

I just have one thing to say, for what they are paying they could have signed Schmidt and Zito and I'd rather have that than Matszuka. Don't get me wrong I think Matszuka if healthy is going to be a top notch pitcher but the amount of money (between the posting fee and what his contract will be) will likely make the net cost an Arod like cost (obviously Matszuka won't be getting that much but the BoSox will be paying that much). Of course one thing to focus on is how good the BoSox will be able to market in Japan. Plus they may have a new untap market (although I have no idea if Boston has much of an Asian population). I know the Angels were players because Moreno thought he could make a bloody fortune by having the premiere Japanese pitcher throwing in Anaheim (we have a huge Asian population here and in LA) and would also have a huge following in japan if they could have landed him.

These prices change my off-season philosphy and it means we move both Buehrle and Garcia (since both there contracts are up) and try to get pitchers whom we could control a bit longer. I'd deal one of them for top notch pitching prospects (cause those will be very valuable in a time of rising salaries) and than swing the other one for basically another good pitcher whose signed a bit longer (maybe in a situation where we are taking a chance...but are getting a guy thats just coming off a down year thats signed for a couple more years).

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Nov 14, 2006 -> 08:18 PM) Garland is a sinkerball pitcher playing in an extreme home run park. IMO there are 2 types of pitchers the sox should employ if they want to keep this style of park, sinkerballers and strikeout guys. Out of all of our pitchers Garland would be the last pitcher on the list I would trade. He is young, is affordable, and has some good upside still. Bmac is the next guy I wouldnt trade. The rest, whatever gets us the best deal. Seriously, JG should not go anywhere. Plus he's got great initials. On a sidenote, apparently the Mets are after Peavy as well and they seem to be throwing Milledge's name out to any team that is willing. He's such an over-rated prospect its not even funny. Glad to see the paper indicating that Kenny felt that Milledge was really no better than Sweeney (well they didn't specifically name Sweeney, rather said the trio of CF prospects).

QUOTE(Buehrle>Wood @ Nov 14, 2006 -> 09:44 PM) Now with MGS4 though likely coming to the 360, there really aren't many killer software aps for the PS3 to validate buying the system. Heck, it's lost the exclusitivity on the GTA, Assasin's Creed, Guitar Hero, Dragon Warrior and now possibly MGS franchises within a matter of months. That's bad news. The fact that Halo and GTA will both be on the Xbox 360 is almost enough for me (since those are about the only non sports games I play and well quite frankly all the sports games are available on whatever system is out there). I honestly didn't realize that GTA is no longer exclusive.

QUOTE(SoxPhan7 @ Nov 14, 2006 -> 07:25 PM) You took the words right out of my mouth. GoW and Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter are worth the $400 right there. And the word is that there is going to be a Blu Ray add on to the 360 in the next month or so for $199. So Buy a 360 and wait on the Ps3. Here's the thing and your right, they are going to have an HDDVD add on for the Xbox but at that opint if you buy that you are at the same price as the PS3 and quite frankly the PS3 is a hands down better system if you are talking about the same price. That said I'm still undecided but after playing gods of war on my buddies high def I got to admit its really impressive. Of course I just bought a 1080P TV so I'm thinking in a few months that bad boy would look awfully good hooked up to a blu ray PS3. Than again I could save the difference in cash, get a 360 on Overstock for like 15% off and wait a year and buy a blu ray for a hell of a lot less (that will probably be a lot better and will be done with the war hopefully over and all bluray/hddvd players being pretty much the same.

XBOX360 is on my wish list. That and passing the FAR section of the CPA exam. As far as what i'm going to get, I bought my mom a bigass TV to say thanks for letting me stay at her house for free and I have no idea what I'm going to get other people but as I get older I absolutely love getting people cool gifts.

LOVE IT

QUOTE(knightni @ Nov 14, 2006 -> 05:50 AM) I think people are overestimating the interest in the market for the PS3. The number of "brow-beaten" moms and dads buying will be a lot less with that $600 price tag. Two-three hundred bucks for a system is easier to drop down for the average parent than $600. Especially with many stores eliminating lay-away. Also, I predict that the secondary market could be tougher in the turnaround than many of you who are looking for the fast buck, think. This release is smaller than the Xbox360 release and those systems had no trouble selling for 1500 bucks on EBAY. Plus those systems really aren't priced too much different (200 bucks is a lot but when you consider for 200 bucks you get a BluRay DVD player...well thats value). And I'm not saying many parents are going to buy it, but the video game market is growingly to include many adults and teens and young adults, most of which tend to have money laying around. QUOTE(Palehosefan @ Nov 14, 2006 -> 10:55 AM) Not that it's a huge price difference, but you can get a 20GB PS3 for "only" 500, that's what I'm going to go with as soon I sell either my car or my fiancee. The only problem with the 500 PS3 is that it isn't wireless (internet wise) and that alone is worth the upgrade (plus the bigger hard-drive), imo. But than again I'm just reselling it anyways cause I'm probably gonna resell it, put most of the profits in the bank and than maybe buy a XB360.

They have been working on this for some time so I'm hopefully it finally goes through and my drive to Tuscon can pretty much stop.