Rowand44

CBSsportsline said that the sox would add an extra pitcher but mlb.com doesnt, so we'll see.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:57 PM) Please no to Dunn? I think you'd warm up to him when he walks over 100 times, hits over 40 homers, and does so for the next 10 years. I'd rather have Dunn than Crawford on my team, but I wouldn't complain about either. I'm not a huge fan of Adam Dunn as people know, but most importantly I don't want Scotty in center.

QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:54 PM) Carl Crawford, Hank Blalock, and might I add, Adam Dunn? Would love it, meh, please no.

Done deal it looks like.

QUOTE(hi8is @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:38 PM) yeah and i like the idea of a possible ace better then a possible superstar who has just had sucess up to the AA level. there are guys who hit .400 in AAA and then come up here and never really find it.... let me guess... you thought willie harris was gonna be the next willie mays.... because willie hit .400 in the minors. he coulda been a superstar... no way... trade willie mays for someone like barry zito? are you nuts, willie could be a star!!! Yes of course. I actually thought Willie was the next coming of Babe Ruth, not only did I think he'd be a 50 homer per year guy, I thought he'd close for us as well, unfortunately that didn't work out. I really have no problem dealing Young if the deal is right, however if something like this happened I'd want to trade Jon as well. Brandon needs to be in the rotation imo and if we get Vaz for that proposed deal then you can deal Jon for a stud cf or even a damn good cf and a solid lh reliever. If that was the case the rotation would still be awesome and you'd be able to upgrade the offense and the bullpen, obviously that's a hell of a lot that would have to happen right there.

QUOTE(hi8is @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:32 PM) HAH awsome get el duque off the books and outta the pen... give bmac more time to transition into the leauge.... have another possible ace in the rotation and one in the bullpen..... and no matter how big of a woody you all have for chris young... hes still a prospect... no prospect is a sure thing.... id have to say that a #1 rated CF prospect in AA isnt as important as a possible front line starter with major leauge sucess.... expecially when you are stacked from a minor leauge CF stand point. A possible ace, well Chris Young is a possible superstar as well.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:25 PM) So, we'd resist trading Garland, and instead have a 6 man rotation? And the absence of Chris Young? :headshake This would indicate either another trade is in the works for Garland, or McCarthy is destined for the bullpen. Garland would be gone, I see no possible way Vazquez and Garland are in the same rotation.

QUOTE(SoxnGiants @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:01 PM) I'd hate the trade if Young was added to the deal, I don't even like it much if it were Garland straight up for Vazquez + Cash. Vazquez just hasn't performed well in 1 1/2 years, plus I don't think he's a good fit for the Cell. HOWEVER, Kenny has earned my trust as a fan. He's made excellent deals to get Contreras, who looks like a CY Young candidate, and Garcia and both at less than market value. Both have performed very well in Chicago and both were major components to the World Series, it's not really fair for me to second guess him anymore. I also remember Kenny wanting Chacon who has been excellent after getting out of the thin air, so it seems to me that Kenny knows what he's doing with pitchers (Todd Ritchie notwithstanding). If Vazquez reverts back to his Expos form, a deal for Garland would be a steal (assuming Garland would walk after 2006). Part of me thinks this is a negotiating ploy though. Fantastic post. I agree 100 percent.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 10:52 PM) Well then you should read the book again. Ha, well I'm just saying there isn't a gm in baseball who doesn't look for the so called diamonds in the rough. If you want to call that moneyball fine, I'll call it flying under the radar.

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 10:32 PM) Correct. Pitching is never undervalued, but Kenny highlighted aquiring guys who were undervalued. Garcia was nearly non-tendered 6 months before we got him. Then Kenny signed him to a below-market deal. Contreras was aquired for a pitcher who signed a non-guaranteed minor league deal just 18 months prior, and got some money thrown in to make his salary below market. Add Jenks, Hermanson, Politte -- all undervalued, and his approach seems a little more "moneyball" All gm's do that though cheat. Everyone is always looking for diamonds in the rough I don't think that has anything to do with moneyball.

QUOTE(SnB @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 09:21 PM) anyway you can resize those down a bit? they're gigantic to scroll through. You are a cry baby.

Depaul

QUOTE(FGarcia34 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 09:06 PM) Maybe I missed this or maybe I didnt feel like reading the 26 pages of bickering but why is it assumed that Garland is part of the deal? From the article on whitesox.com: Garland figures to earn in the $6 million range through arbitration, but could be replaced by Brandon McCarthy in the rotation if he was shipped to another team. Of course, the White Sox would prefer to move Orlando 'El Duque' Hernandez and his $4.5 million salary, along with a prospect, setting up one of the best rotations in baseball with Mark Buehrle, Freddy Garcia, Vazquez, Garland and Contreras. The idea of that rotation made me happy in the pants area. So why not ship Chris Young and someone else like Josh Fields for Javier Vasquez and keep Garland around until the end of the season? Because Mccarthy will be better then Vaz imo and there is no point to set him back a year. If this trade were made Garland would be gone one way or another.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 06:43 PM) Byrd and Washburn are replacable. Washburn may yet come back. Washburn also wasn't offered arbitration so he too is a goner.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 06:42 PM) On the other hand...this is a situation which could turn around very fast. I'm thinking mroe and more that Molina may well wind up accepting arbitration and end up with the Angels for another year, For some idiotic reason the Angels did not offer Molina arbitration so he's gone.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 06:34 PM) Because nobody has signed with them? Vlad had a bad ALCS. Anderson had a down year. Colon was hurt in the ALCS. At worst, they will be just as good as last season. I would not overlook the Angel just because we beat them in 5 games in the playoffs. They still have to be the team to beat. Mark it down on your calendar. As of 12/13/05 you have the A's, I'll take the Angels. Barring some assinine trade by either team, I have you locked in. Losing two of their better starters from last year in Washburn and Byrd is what I was referring to as well as losing Molina. EDIT: By the way, dont put me down for any predictions yet, I said as of right now the A's should be the favorites. That being said, there is still plenty of time left in the offseason for the Angels to make some moves.

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 06:13 PM) Contreras will be a free agent after 2006 but we will still have arbitration rights to him. Which doesnt make him a free agent. Something isn't right here, I think because he signed a long term deal when he first came here that makes his contract expire after that season and would not make him protected for us. I'm not sure if that's right but I'm pretty sure we don't hold his rights after this season.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 05:13 PM) Then I will mail you a check for $1 to buy a clue. In the last year (approx) they traded, Mulder Hudson, lost Giambi and Tejada in previous years ... and replaced them with some great pitching prospects and Jay Payton, Bradley, Kendall ... :puke Loiza. Favorite?? I think the Angels are a pretty dam good team. They have a top 3 rotation in the AL, a dominate end of the bullpen and a decent lineup. They wont win the series I will guarantee you that, and they probably won't get out of the first round but right now they have to be the favorites to win the West considering the Angels have definitely regressed.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 05:07 PM) It is official. The Oakland A's are sraping the bottom of the barrel. Bottom Feeders Club Pirates, D-Rays, Royals, Rockies New 2006 Members Marlins, A's The A's have to be the favorites as of right now to win the West so I have no clue what you're talking about.

QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 04:37 PM) I'd have to imagine so...unless Beane has something else up his sleeve. I am probably one of the few who likes Bradley...he has a questionable on the field attitude, and a questionable opinion...but he reminds me a bit of Carl Everett. In fact, I might say that he reminds me a lot of Carl Everett. Fiery and sometimes outlandish personality, the occasional dumb on the field incident, but he appears to have a huge desire to win. I like the move for the A's atleast in the short term, assuming it's not a huge prospect they are giving up. I like Bradley the player as well but he's much different then Carl. Carl really had one bad incident that has stuck with him, Bradley has had incident after incident including clubhouse problems which Carl never had.

So does this deal signalize no Frank to Oakland? If Swisher is moving to first base then I assume Dan Johnson will Dh meaning no room for Frank.

This is from an A's blog, I'm not sure if it's a credible source or not but anyways: This deal will be announced in the next hour. The A's get Milton Bradley and Antonio Perez for prospect Andre Ethier. Looks like a great deal for the A's. Billy has done it again. But it raises a few questions. One, what does this mean for Frank Thomas possibly signing? What does Bradley coming to the A's mean for Jay Payton. What does Perez mean for Marco Scutaro? Great deal if you ask me.

From rotoworld: The A's have acquired Milton Bradley from the Dodgers for one of their top prospects, FOXSports.com's Ken Rosenthal reports.

QUOTE(chitownsportsfan @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 12:09 PM) The Sox were built on run prevention (pitching + defense) because the market was undervaluing these skills. That is what made the Sox so efficient with their modest payroll in 2005. Since when has the market undervalued pitching?? Kenny built this team on the most traditionalist way possible with pitching and defense. I'm sure almost every organization has some stat guy that does their thing and that is obviously Hahn here but the Sox are far from a moneyball team, just look at their offense last year.

QUOTE(whitesoxmanager @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:46 AM) and all KW does is play fantasy baseball. :headshake :headshake