Chisoxfn

QUOTE (ozzfest @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 11:39 AM) has this specific source made any predictions on trades or signings b4 that have turned out to be right? SoxNet.net/Soxtalk have been a part of breaking the news on many ocassions, so yes, we have a track-record of being accurate. But remember, we aren't saying a trade is imminent, just that the teams have had preliminary discussions. Whether it moves past that stage or not, we shall see.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 11:14 AM) 2 years and $23M left on that deal. If you pick up Adrian and Matthews and only shed Konerko from the 25 man roster and get no cash in return you're effectively paying Gonzalez $16.625M per year for the next 2 years since Matthews is just about useless (he's at or below a replacement level player and such players are by definition everywhere). So even though Adrian is an incredible value you're not saving any money in the long run, you're just adding to the payroll ($3.75 in '10 and $17.5M in '11) which actually makes him a less attractive target via trade. The Angels and Matthews aren't on good terms and he's going to ultimately get out-right released. They will trade him if they can, but if they can't he will be gone. In short, having to absorb all of Matthews salary would not make the deal worth it. In fact, if the Angels were willing to shed that entire, contract, they'd be giving up all of the noteable prospects to get Gonzalez so in that instance, why wouldn't they just go after Adrian. Anyway, in short, I'm with ya Kal, forget about the name GMJ.

QUOTE (Princess Dye @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 10:42 AM) I guess I kind of differ from some people here, but I see our awesome 5-man rotation as being of less use if it's going to stand with the current lineup alongside it. I would move one of Danks/Floyd to get this deal done. Obviously only if I had to, but I would not let it be a stopping point. Reason being--the freaky part about this deal is how it would actually save us money in year 1. We could get back into the FA hunt. Well actually there are several freaky things about this deal. Remember that he'll be getting about 20M a year once he enters FA, so you can't go hand out a ton of long-term contracts and than expect to keep Gonzalez around.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 10:32 AM) You are assuming that LAA is in this deal primarily for Konerko. On the contrary, I'd be they are in it to get the right spect or two, and Konerko is a nice 1B/DH fill, as a secondary desired piece. You are also assuming that LAA has what SD wants - the only reason you even have 3-way trades is that a 1-to-1 deal doesn't fulfill their needs. SD may be able to justify losing A-Gon because of the COMBINATION of what they'd get from the two other trading parties. The big thing is, I'd have to think the Sox have what the Pads want, however, the Sox need the Angels to take on Konerko's salary or at least a chunk of it to enable them to make this deal. Or at least that has to be what Kenny has in mind.

QUOTE (KevinM @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 10:29 AM) Yeah, not buying it. I'm guessing the Angels aren't jumping at the bit to get a mediocre, overpaid first baseman while also ensuring that one of their fellow AL contenders gets a far better player at the same position. Why wouldn't they just go after Gonzalez? Any package we put together could easily be trumped (save me the 7-8 player package KHP, it's not realistic). I think some people are underestimate just how poor the economy is. I realize Adrian Gonzalez doesn't make a ton of money, but he'll be a FA soon enough and will be demanding mega-bucks. Ultimately very few teams are going to find themselves in a position to make a run at Gonzalez because they probably wouldn't be willing to unload the type of quality high level young, cheap minor league talent it would take to get him. The Sox might be one of those teams. Most of the other teams that could be possibilities would be unable to beat a Sox offer, imo. The BoSox are one of the few teams that could potentially blow the Sox out of the water, but who knows if they would have the interest to do so (ie an Ellsbury/Bucholtz package). We also underestimate the fact that the Angels like Paulie.

QUOTE (striker62704 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 10:27 AM) Think Konerko would waive his no-trade clause? He's always said he'd waive his no trade clause if the Sox felt they could make the team better by moving him. The Angels are on the west coast and he was very very close to going there after the world series year. They are also a perennial contender. Without a doubt, Paulie would accept a move there, imo.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 09:50 AM) I don't see how this makes sense without the Sox taking on GMJ or Ervin Santana in the deal. Why would they give up prospects that the Padres would want in a AGon deal for 1 year of Konerko at $12M? It would make sense for them to give up good prospects to shed bad deals, but the Angels could just go out and re-sign Vladdy to DH for a couple million without giving up anything. Or even better yet, they could put Abreu at DH since that's where he belongs anyway. Every year since about 2005 we've had Paulie to the Angels rumors. This year it makes less sense than in any other. I think someone's source is misinformed here. The Angels really like Paulie and I think the bigger question would be how much if anything would the Angels be putting in on this deal. It could be more or less the Sox moving Konerko and not getting much in return and the main portion of the deal being the prospects the club sends. I want no one to think that we are reporting this as a done deal or anything of the sort. Just that discussions were made regarding that deal...my guess is 1-5% of all deals that get discussed ever turn into a finalized deal (if not less than that).

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 09:41 AM) The Sox could put in an extra piece or two certainly. but the whole idea here would be...a fair deal for AGon without picking up another high ceiling player might be a 4-5 for 1 deal, involving basically everyone we have. Deal Konerko, suddenly find yourself having salary flexibility if you don't send over too much money, pick up another guy that you can stick in that deal such that you don't need to send over all those guys. I'd bet you could pull it off. Konerko being a part of the deal makes it much more probable because it gives the Sox some financial flexibility to fill other holes while getting a huge bat.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 09:36 AM) What sources did you guys get this from? There's no way we get Gonzalez for Pauly and spects. We have our sources, but we are only stating the teams have had preliminary discussions and that those were the main parameters. Nothing is imminent that we know of.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 09:34 AM) The Angels still have a solid OF with Rivera, Hunter, and Abreu, unless they want to move Abreu to DH. What they might be missing in their lineup right now is a replacement for Vlad though. Konerko or Morales could DH though.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 09:31 AM) I hope the Angels over value PK so we may not have to give up as many prospects for AGon...this would be quite the deal if it works out. Like Jake Peavy times 5 The Angels front office, Scioscia, and ownership all like Konerko. Doesn't mean they'll give up a ton of top prospects and I have to imagine the Sox would be sending one or two of Flowers/Viciedo/Morel/Danks 2

Sox Talking Three Way Deal for Adrian Gonzalez By SoxNet.net SoxNet.net has learned that the Chicago White Sox have had preliminary discussions with the Anaheim Angels and San Diego Padres on a potential 3 way deal which would involve Paul Konerko, Adrian Gonzalez, and Angel and White Sox prospects. SoxNet.net is not aware of the specifics of the trade (ie, names of prospects and exact details as to how many prospects, etc) but the discussions are built on the Sox sending Konerko and prospects in-return for Adrian Gonzalez. The Angels would receive Konerko with the Padres receiving a combination of Sox and Angel prospects. Full Story

Iowa is in deep s***

Come on Iowa....find a way to win this thing in OT!!!

Damn, Vanderberg looks fantastic in the 1st half. 4 drops, well 3 drops and a tough grab that Moeaki should make (which turned into a pick) have prevented us from scoring more, but a phenomenal 1st half performance for a freshman QB @ Ohio State.

QUOTE (Tex @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 03:43 PM) From what I've seen in Texas, getting into the alternative cert program basically requires a Bachelors and a pulse. It was getting hired that is tough. If there is a teacher shortage, it ain't around here. Nor in Cali.....probably the hardest job to find out there in California is a teaching job.

Sorry Heads, I was rooting for you guys to get him.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 11:33 AM) 9, 20, 25, 14. The number of TD's he's thrown. 68 TD's to 54 Int's. I'd hardly call that ratio "good." http://www.pro-football-reference.com/lead...perc_career.htm (if you have trouble finding him, he's #68) And what's this nonsense about him having to "force" it? They were down, at most, 4 pts all of last night. It's not like he had to get a TD every time he got the f'n ball. Why don't you look at the picks he's thrown while leading games and not get too focused ont he ones he's thrown when the team is down 14 points or more. Most of Cutler's picks in Denver came at times where he was chasing double digit deficits thanks to the defenses. Put him on a solid team with a solid defense and my goodness.

By the way, I really want to see more of Ashmandou or however it is spelled. I liked him a lot in the preseason.

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 11:25 AM) No, the pick 6 I was referring to was when Cutler tried to force a throw instead of throwing it out of bounds. His hand got hit as he threw it, and the ball floated in the air and ended up falling incomplete. Ya, that was a bad one. I remember that vividly. It was the play after Hester damn near F'd up. Devin had a really really bad game. He's made massive strides as a WR, but tonight was just an awful performance.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 11:24 AM) Are you kidding? 2006 - 5 games, 5 ints 2007 - 16 games, 14 int 2008 - 16 games, 18 int 2009 - 9 games, 17 int I'd consider more than an int per game average a "turnover prone" QB. Not when you throw for the TD's he does. I put everything in perspective and his TD to Turnover ratio ain't bad historically.

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 11:21 AM) Wasn't he among the league leaders last year in interceptions? Like I said yesterday, I like Cutler a lot (especially compared to Orton), but he's not living up to the hype, plain and simple. I've been more impressed with Jay than I ever expected to be (and I loved him in Denver). Bottom line he's had such s*** to work with and still put the team on the back as much as possible. I think anyone that can't see that is honestly blind to an extent and doesn't really realize how dependent a QB is on a lot of things (WR's who know how to run routes, who know that it is there responsibility to make the right read for the route to run depending on the way the defense is playing, etc). Our Wr's just flat out don't do it and because of it they get open so much less and it makes Jay have to be perfect on every throw. Factor in the worse rushing game in football (we are so much worse than any other team...Forte had a few big runs this season and outside of that he's literally been running at like 2 YPC) with the worse oline in football and WOW is all I have to say. What the hell could anyone expect? I don't think people realize just how bad this team is.

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 13, 2009 -> 11:20 AM) No idea what play I was referring to, but I don't think it had to do with a throw to Hester. Nah, I later realized you were talking about the throw to Kellen Davis, which was an obvious PI. The pick 6 you were referring to was a throw where Hester just waited for the ball instead of going after it and because of it a Niner was able to almost jump the route and take it for six.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 12:53 PM) This happens entirely too often. I wish Byron could take the reigns in Chicago and coach up D-Rose like he did CP3. No thank you. Byron Scott is not a good head coach.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 12, 2009 -> 12:10 PM) Yeah, that's entirely a case of a coach taking the fall for managements mistakes. Nah, Byron Scott wasn't the genius in New Jersey (Eddie Jordan was) and he just doesn't have the ability to get his guys to respect him. Bottom line, he's lost his team in New Jersey and now in Charlotte and that is why he's gone.