nitetrain8601

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 01:09 PM) Waiting to the trade deadline only limits your trading partners. Remember last year, no one made big trades, pretty much everyone stood pat. Right now everyone outside of a few teams feel that they are x amount of moves away. The Dodgers have to feel that they are close, if we can get the relievers that are being talked about, you get them. Our bullpen would be good to go for a long time not just this year. The problem last year was that there was still alot of teams in contention for their division/playoff spot. That's why a lack of moves were made. The only exception was Cincy with Ken Griffey Jr. because they were in the middle of selling the team. Again, look at the Villone deal. Look at the Farnsworth deal. Florida and Atlanta overpaid for those guys. Your prospects are usually not worth much to a team in the middle of a season which is why you could ripoff a team completely at the deadline.

QUOTE(VAfan @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 12:33 PM) Two bullpen arms for Jon Garland??? I can believe the rest of the post, but there are no bullpen arms we would get in trade who would equal the value of Jon Garland. Let's just talk about West Coast teams, since that's where everyone assumes he wants to go. Angels: Kelvim Escobar, Scott Shields?? A viable pair from our perspective, but there's no way the Angels would make that trade. They'd want to give us back end of the bullpen guys like Kevin Gregg or maybe Brendan Donnelly. No thanks. Dodgers: You guys have thrown around a lot of names, but do you realize not a single Dodger reliever other than Eric Gagne had an ERA below 3.73? That's Luis Vizcaino's ERA from the AL. So anyone we'd get from them is liable to make our bullpen worse than it was last year. I'd say that's getting great value for an 18-game winner. Giants: Scott Eyre was their best guy, and he's gone. Everyone else would make you miss Vizcaino and Marte. Seattle: Eddie Guardado would provide some value, and Julio Mateo looks decent enough on paper, but do you think Garland wants to play in Seattle, and that they are willing to pay him? San Diego: I don't think they are going to send us Trevor Hoffman. And they can't afford Garland anyway. To trade a front-line starter like Garland for bullpen arms makes no sense whatsoever. I don't believe Kenny Williams is that dumb. Knowing what happened when we were a starter short in 2001-2004, I think he'd rather keep Garland and lose him to FA than accept no value in return. In the long run, the Sox need to replace their outfield. Brian Anderson may or may not make it; same for Jerry Owens and Ryan Sweeney. Podsednik's wheels already look shaky after one year, and without them he's a marginal ballplayer at best. Dye is going to be 32 this year, but isn't likely to match his 2005 production over a full season again. The irony of this, of course, is that the Sox traded their best outfield prospect for Javier Vazquez, and there's no guarantee we'd get someone as good even though we have a better pitcher to offer. The reason is Garland's contract status. Vazquez is Sox property for 3 years. Garland is only a 1-year rental, with no guarantee he'll repeat his 2005 form for a new club with shakier defense and a different catcher calling the game. So from my perspective, the Sox should keep Garland and take the draft picks when he walks. Keeping him gives us the best chance of repeating the division title and facing down the Yankees in the playoffs. And I'd certainly take another shot at winning the World Series over a couple of mediocre bullpen arms. It doesn't matter where Garland wants to play. He's going to play there. I'm sure he would like to play in Seattle simply because the chances of him keeping his current market value or have it go up jumps up greatly since that's a huge pitcher's park. Seattle would want him because they have a frontline starter for at least 1 year and might be able to actually compete for the division next year. I don't know who Seattle would give up though. And I was saying yesterday that we probably and should hang onto Garland til around the trading deadline because that's when you could rip off teams.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 11:48 AM) We better get two damn good relievers. Cause if I read that right...a major league one, and one on the cusp I think of Brazoban and Broxton and I'd throw up at the idea of that. Its not getting enough. We have something EVERYONE wants and we better not get talent for it. I'm sorry, we gave up Chris Young for Vazquez (there were financial reasons as well) but nothing tells me we shouldn't get a little more for Jon Garland. I don't know. A lot of people are really high on Broxton. That was one of the main guys Boston wanted for Manny when they were dangling him to LA. Lots of Dodger and even Angel fans think he could be a dominant setup man.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 22, 2005 -> 09:16 AM) This is the best part of the deal. Zambranos agent is.........Borasss. Which means, not only will they lose their golden boy Mark Prior, but when Z is ready for FA, they will lose him too. Boy I love Jim Hendry. The Cubs are actually one of the few teams who deal with Boras.

I expect him to be injured by tommorow.

QUOTE(AddisonStSox @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 02:11 PM) I think you might be in the minority. Have you seen the market for starting pitching this off-season? Have you seen what quality pitchers are getting? Have you seen what bad pitchers are getting? It's insane. Chalk it up to Burnett's contract, the Sox proving you win championships with pitching and defense, or whatever else you want, but pitching...especially young, cheap, effective pitching...you are going to have to pay for it. Look no further than a trade completed yesterday for Christ's sake. If Adam Eaton and a bullpen arm are worth an organization's number one prospect--HANDS DOWN--an MLB-ready young arm, and another prospect or two, why are you telling me the Sox can't ask, or can't expect an organization's number one prospect in return. If you trade Garland to a West Coast team, his value also increases as he has been known to want to sign on the west coast when he hits free agency. Put it all together. Kenny should expect a number one prospect in return for a guy that has finally put it all together and found himself amongst the best in baseball last year. Garland was a f***ing all-star. I don't care if he is in his walk year. You find a team that will pay for a healthy, effective, cheap #2 starter. Period. I'm just not buying it.

QUOTE(knightni @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:30 PM) Looks like Kenny's trades haven't been too bad huh? We should pick up Escobar just to trade him again.

QUOTE(rudylaw @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 01:27 PM) I think 3y 24mil is not a bad offer for Jon. Unfortunately the market is crazy right now and he will get more elsewhere. He has had 1 good year. 3-24 is not bad for a pitcher that has had 1 good year. The way the market is set now, it's a horrible contract, especially for a 27 year old.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:59 PM) This has probably been hashed and rehashed on this thread but these rotoworld quotes let you know a few things. Colletti is aggressive and is trying to put a contender on the field this year, and has money to spend. The dodgers can afford a top tier pitcher like Garland, and could have a 72 hour window to get a long term deal done. He is a better option from a durability standpoint than Millwood, and he provides a better pitcher than Weaver ever was. The fact that they are having Appier throwing in a workout doesnt mean that he will make the team, it just means that they are open to getting pitching in any form or manner for their team. Garland to Dodgers for top tier prospects sounds like a good fit for both teams. Sure does. Get Kenny on the phone!

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:49 PM) Yes, what Vazquez did in Montreal is a few years away. He hasn't done s*** since the 1st half of the year with the Yanks (after that he was completely terrible and was very up and down for the Dbacks last year). Vazquez has good stuff, but just cause every guy has good stuff doesn't mean the Sox can just take him in and work there magic, turning them into aces. But who knows, maybe Coop is the 2nd coming of Mazzone. Mazzone is the 2nd coming of Coop is more like it.

QUOTE(sircaffey @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:42 PM) You really think KW would be one to trade away from his major league team mid season and make it worse? Unless he gets major league talent back, I highly doubt KW would be willing to do that. That is, unless we aren't in contention, knock on wood. You either make it worse now and probably get inferior talent for him or you make it worse later and get better talent and probably are able to asses your needs more. I'd wait to deal him if at all.

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:32 PM) I'd rather have Brazoban, he tired a bit at the end of the year, given a consistent set up role, or spot relief, I think he could be lights out. I agree. He has the stuff, plus he would be the #4 or 5 reliever on the team. He'd be great whenever he came in.

QUOTE(knightni @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:27 PM) Garland would be required to sign a deal with LA before the trade would go through. Billingsley, Guzman and Brazoban or no deal. Now you're asking for a king's ransom. I think they would give up any combination of those two players, but not all 3.

QUOTE(3E8 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:23 PM) There will be a team that starts the season with a below average 5th starter but a decent offense that has playoff hopes at the deadline. All they will need is one more arm for a strong playoff push. They wouldn't trade for Garland now, but they definitely would at the deadline. Like in '98 Houston trading Freddy Garcia and Carlos Guillen for Randy Johnson (look at his stats that year before he was traded). I think you are right about trading him at the deadline being too risky. We don't know which Garland we will get the first half of next season and the only suitors for him at the deadline may be direct competitors in the AL. Well the whole risk thing is another aspect.

BULLs***!

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:13 PM) That's what I get for having relatives who live on the east coast. We were playing the Phillies that weekend where one of the games was rained out and another was an absolute shootout where Thome destroyed us. Force them to move to the Southside of Chicago.

QUOTE(qwerty @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:09 PM) In this case i most definitely think it is different. Any team that trades for him knows in advance he wants to test the market next off-season. I cannot see any team wanting half a season of a guy over a full especially if they were in need of major league pitching. Also, it is way to risky for the sox to wait until the dead line because garland is far from a lock to repeat his numbers of last year. His stock is at an all time high with the white sox as far as i am concerned. I disagree. I think any team that's in contention that needs a SP will go after him. Look at us and Freddy. Reed was considered a top prospect, Olivo a nice catcher, and Morse a throw-in. On paper at the time, it was a great deal for Seattle. Cubs did it with Nomar knowing he was a FA at the end of the season.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:05 PM) Ya, I edited my response. He didn't contribute much at all in 04 but he was supposed to be their starting shortstop and I was actually at Fenway for his first game back and there was such a buzz there and he was going to help lead them to a title, yada yada. So you're willing to go to a Red Sox game at Fenway instead of spending that cash at U.S. Cellular Field?? Some type of White Sox fan you are. BANDWAGON JUMPER!!!

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:46 AM) See the Mulder deal of last year and the Vazquez deal of this past week. You can still get a good return on a quality starting pitcher before the season begins. But you could rip off teams at the deadline. You usually only get best value in the offseason for prospects. If you have a legit Major leaguer, you're better off trying to trade him at the deadline because you would get a lot better prospects who probably aren't worth it in the deal. (E.G. Farnsworth to ATL deal, Villone to FLA deal). You also trade him at the deadline because you see you may have a glaring hole in the bullpen or somewhere else and you could always plug in McCarthy in the 5th slot.

He was going crazy last night. 30 points in the 3rd. I would've continued to let him play.

QUOTE(Jenks Heat @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:44 AM) What is Brad Penny's situation? I do not follow the NL and thought he was up and down and injury prone to a degree but what is the money situation, could he go to the pen? I think Garland will be dealt and signed by that team as part of a blockbuster deal. The team that trades for him will not do so as a one year stopgap. Remember if he is traded and not resigned, they get two first round picks most likely. Penny will start. They still are 1 starter short.

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:25 AM) That would be scary. Check out his control. http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/B/d...brazelton.shtml 5.05 BB/9 in the majors. That's why we get Coop to work with him.

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:33 AM) I'm calling BS. If Arizona was able to get a five-tool, potential superstar in Chris Young for a pitcher who has been league average for the past two years, and who carries a big contract -- then we NEED to land either Billingsley or Guzman. If we don't get those two, it better be one helluva package that includes both Miller, Jackson, Broxton, and possibly another prospect. If given the choice between Billingsley and Guzman, I think I'd take Billingsley, just because we're going to need a cheap starter besides B-Mac in the next year or two. I'm also slightly worried about Guzman's 3/1 K/BB ratio (almost 130 K's); but that's me also doing a bit of nit-picking, as he was only 20 last year in AA. If a team doesn't want to give KW a knock-your-socks-off type deal right now, wait till the trade deadline. Because, I'm pretty sure Garland would be the TOP commodity at the deadline. Gosh, I'm so hoping for a Kazmir-for-Zambrano type, lopsided deal. Which is why I think Kenny will wait for the deadline. That's when you could rip off teams for their prospects.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:09 AM) I hope Willie is back. He's a better player than a lot of you think. I would probably take Willie over Gload simply because we know Ozzie likes speed. The second the Sox got Makoviak, I think Gloads days in this org were done (imo). Byrnes wouldn't be bad (I happen to like the guy). I think he's pretty solid all around, but IIRC he had a rough 05. Still I think someone will give him pretty decent money. Also, when did Byrnes move to RF? I remember with the A's the guy was always in left. I agree with your assesment. BRING BACK WILLIE!

QUOTE(AnthraxFan93 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 11:09 AM) That should be in green I'd give him a look as a reliever, no doubt.