Chisoxfn

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 3, 2010 -> 10:59 AM) Whether or not GM's fall for that, I think that's exactly what Kenny is doing. Otherwise...why would he have come out and said anything at all? There's no benefit to coming out and saying that Peavy won't be ready for April if he's not going to be ready, it puts us in a worse negotiating position in other ways, because teams will know that the Sox will be in the market for a 6th-starter type. I don't quite follow your rationale. If we are in the market of adding a starting pitcher, than having Peavy healthy actually makes it easier for us to trade for a starter (potentially) since we can say we are dealing from a position of strength. If he's not healthy, than I still don't see how it changes things because I'm pretty sure other teams know the Sox have to count on Peavy potentially returning anyway. I just don't agree with your rationale, but I also don't really think the Sox are considering moving Floyd/Danks at least not for what has been rumored. And if they do, I think they would have to be blown away and very very confident that Peavy will be back healthy (which I don't see). I know one thing, I really don't want Freddy back. I know he was a valuable innings eater, but I just like the idea that guys have upside and he has none of it.

I'll f***ing take that.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 3, 2010 -> 10:51 AM) Omar is a zillion times better in the IF and Jones at worst probably costs half what Teahen makes. Dumping that piece of garbage and replacing him with Jones, then getting out of that 2012 commitment with some extra cash in our pockets makes us a better baseball team. I don't know if you are just going to be able to dump him, but I could be wrong. If it takes 6M to remove him, than I don't know if I agree with that.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 3, 2010 -> 10:50 AM) I still think KW is flat out lying when he says Peavy won't be ready for opening day. What value is there in him lying about that? Does he feel it gives him more leverage? And if so, how? Unless you feel that he wants to move one of our starters and he can say, hey, I don't want to trade starter X and can't trade him because Peavy won't be back, so you need to blow me away? But I don't really think many GM's are going to fall for that. Ultimately, when it comes to any trade you need to determine if the other team is going to give you what you consider appropriate value and vice versa.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 3, 2010 -> 10:47 AM) By the way...everyone is writing down that they're not allowed to complain when Linebrink has a legitimate solid season in the NL, right? I think he will be solid. I don't think he's worth what the Sox were paying him and he didn't really fit our roll since we need more regularly consistent set-up guys. Since as of now we essentially have Santos and Thorty (thorty is a rock if healthy, but Santos is still very raw). I might be missing someone, but Sale is our 5th starter currently.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 3, 2010 -> 10:46 AM) Teahen is overpaid for his job...but being able to be a backup IF and backup OF in a pinch is really useful for that 4th guy off the bench. It makes no sense to dump Teahen if we have to send salary along with him. In the current situation, Teahen could be pretty valuable. Its nice having a guy like him who you can go to in a pinch at multiple positions. I wish he didn't make quite as much as he did, but there is some value in that flexibility. Plus if Morel struggles at third you at least have another option instead of just using Omar Vizquel full time (or Viciedo), not that I want Teahen to be a regular at 3B.

If we have Tony Pena, we don't really need DJ, imo.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Dec 3, 2010 -> 10:07 AM) Besides the fact that D.Lee is one whole year older, everything else is in his favor. He's got a higher career ops, much better defender, better athlete and will make much less money on this upcoming contract and once again, this is a real easy decision imo. The fact that Derrek had a bad first half of last season while battling some injuries doesn't change that fact. I really like the idea of Dlee. I don't know what his long-term health outlook looks like, but if he's fine than I'm ok with him on a 2yr deal worth 14-20M in guaranteed plus some incentives. I think it would be foolish to assume he's going to get half of what Konerko gets in general. It isn't like Lee is some scrub. I think a lot of you suggesting we can get him at 5 to 6M are severley underestimating his value. I could be wrong though, but he's been pretty productive the past few seasons and has been relatively healthy over his career. If he ends up with 5 to 6 per season, its because not enough teams are in the market for a 1st baseman and he ends up having to take less, but he'd look damn good at 1B. If we had an option of Paulie and no relievers or DLee at a few mill less plus an added arm to our pen, I'll go Dlee.

The Dodgers actually like Link a bit and he pitched a little bit for the big league team at the end of the season. Plus Link (along with Ely) helped us get Pierre. Link worked out since we got him in a deadline deal for Mr. Mack IIRC.

Sox must have sent at least a couple million, right?

Cofield was one of six players in the Braves organization who played in the AFL. Apparently he has a good body type and nice velocity. Cox has liked him dating back to 2007/2008. This isn't a bad deal, especially if there is no salary involved. I wonder what he did in the AFL.

Wait wait wait, I'd be shocked if the Sox weren't sending some cash over. But I like this for the fact that it frees up money. I hope the Sox use this money for bullpen help.

Does anyone know if the Mets are planning on dealing Frankie Rodriguez and if so I assume they'd be getting very little for him due to his contract and off the field issues. He could be a nice closer to pick up. I know he injured himself in the fight and ended up missing the rest of the season but he still has above average stuff and has been an effective closer and would be an upgrade over Jenks.

QUOTE (Rooftop Shots @ Dec 3, 2010 -> 07:25 AM) Nice post! Totally agree! I second it. RIP Mr. Santo. You were an great baseball player and an asset to the game of baseball!!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Dec 2, 2010 -> 03:11 PM) If you sign Konerko and Dunn, everyone knows you're selling him because you have no spot to play him. I'd tell those teams that he can play 3B and outfield and get his at bats and develop that way. There are ways to make it work if teams try to give up crap for him.

The questions are how do we get our bullpen in tact. From a roster standpoint, we are pretty well set outside of having to worry about Quentin playing defense. I guess Viciedo could become expendable, but I wouldn't want to just give him up. And is Sale our 5th starter?

Do you trade Viciedo for a young pitcher? Does Jackson become available? Who knows. Morel is going to be at 3rd and I see many reasons to consider going younger at catcher if an option was out there. I'd still be a fan of Napoli behind the dish or Russ Martin.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 1, 2010 -> 01:30 PM) Eh, he didn't too much and in college, he didn't have a position. That's why people are shocked he was taken #4 overall over Jerryd Bayless. He had great workouts, but Westbrook, in no way, showed the capability of what he does now, in college. He didn't suck, but he nowhere met his hype from when he was in high school. Same goes for Jrue Holiday. Wasn't good. People out west knew all about Westbrook. He was overshadowed to an extent by Collison/Farmar/Afflalo (I think one of them wasn't actually on that team, but I might be wrong) but the guy was very very productive and incredibly explosive and showed that at UCLA. Westbrook was always the second best pure NBA prospect on that squad and he had tremendous work outs on top of it. I thought it was surprising he went 4th, but everyone knew he could jump out of a building and was an upper echelon defender in college.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 1, 2010 -> 11:24 AM) Didn't know how much of a terror Westbrook was on until I read this thread. Wowzers. I remember watching him at UCLA and thinking he was one of the most overrated players I had ever seen. As someone who watches a lot of UCLA basketball, I have no idea how you could have thought Westbrook was overrated. He was a strong defensive player in college, who was a nice passer, and explosive athlete. His shot got better during his brief career at UCLA and has continued to improve in the NBA. That UCLA team was very well coached and prepared for the NBA.

QUOTE (FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 30, 2010 -> 09:50 PM) It's certainly not an entirely financial-based decision (especially when the state of California will end up with a huge legal bill for the court costs they will incur once they are legally at odds with federal authorities on marijuana). It just makes sense for largely progressive California to be at the front of this debate. Largely progressive, more like largely retarded. Worse run state in the union by a mile.

I'd be ok with Lee and Dunn. That depends on what Lee will sign for and you woudl have to deal Quentin which kind of stinks because you are selling low on him (I say you must move him because Dunn would have to be the DH and Quentin shouldn't play the OF regularly).

I believe it is compared to what your tax basis is in the home at the point of sale. That is if you are talking about a tax loss. If you are talking about a financial loss, you'd have loss on the sale of your home and than you'd have losses associated with financing in theory and technically if you sell your home for less than you owe, than you actually have a gain related to debt forgiveness.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 29, 2010 -> 05:34 PM) Well of course they could. A lot of teams "on any given Sunday" could beat a whole lot of teams. That doesn't change the fact that Iowa lost to every team they played worth a damn outside of MSU. And they have some horrible losses in Northwestern and now Minnesota. Just because they are very capable certainly doesn't mean anything if they don't play up to their capabilities time and time again. I don't disagree with that. They are still better than pretty much every team Boise State and/or TCU played.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Nov 29, 2010 -> 03:02 PM) However Iowa is probably as good as anything that Boise played this season. They are judged purely on record which is not always a good indicator of team strength and talent. Absolutely agree. I think Iowa on any given Saturday could beat a whole lot of teams. Unfortunately, Iowa didn't execute when needed at the end of games.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 29, 2010 -> 10:12 AM) Playing a good (and ranked) Nevada team versus playing a terrible Michigan team will do that to you. I didn't post this in reaction to any other discussion here. I'm saying that OSU will probably be the second Big Ten team in a BCS bowl, whereas Boise State won't, despite having a similar SOS and more quality wins. End of the day it's about money, but if I'm a Boise State fan I'd be mad too. And the strength of the WAC has nothing to do with it. SoS clearly evened out over the season. Iowa s***ting their pants during the second half of the season probably hurt OSU's strength of schedule significantly.