Princess Dye

The Angels are involved because KW would want to dump some salary, as well as make another team send a prospect (that means one more prospect saved by the Sox) Now whether it's real or not is a totally different matter than overestimating AGon. The rumor itself states this is preliminary discussion, which could be nothing or the beginning of something. We have to look at it like this -- the Padres will want 3 or 4 young ready now talents. If we can count Hudson and Flowers each as one, then the third one would likely have to be one of our pitchers.....or something from another organization. There's no way Padres would do this for a package similar to what they got for Peavy. Hudson and Flowers are higher ceiling prospects than Poreda/Clayton but the big difference is Peavy had a salary that required dumping.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 05:12 PM) Konerko has no value? Whoa there now He had a bounce back year, but after that '08 slump - you're pretty much at best going to dump that contract for middling prospects, or do some kind of lateral move where maybe you get a slightly better guy on a more problematic contract.

For those just checking in, yea it's basically the soxnet post...and then I think there was a poster or two saying they had heard something about discussions ongoing. Thats about it.

QUOTE (SoxFan562004 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 04:25 PM) I am a huge fan of PK and really like the future potential of Hudson and Flowers, but if those guys leaving equal Gonzalez, then I am down for it. It will take nothing away from what Paulie did for this franchise and team, but Gonzalez at 1st makes this team a lot better Also, as popular as Paulie is around here, we have to remember how utterly horrible his slumps are. And long lasting

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 04:18 PM) I guess I'm the one person in Soxdom that despises giving up Paulie. Seriously, is there anything that the Angels can toss in that we can't match from our own system? Plus, Paulie would be a darn good DH, since he'd stay healthy, I could see him hitting .280, 30 HR, 100 RBI's easy as a full time DH. If theres anyway to cut out the Angels, do it Kenny. Keep Paulie. (Note: Bias coming from fact I'm wearing my Paulie shirt) I think w/o Beckham included we still have the reserves to get it done for AG. It's just a matter of whether or not KW wants to lose the two big prospects and a starter. I would think that'd be a little too much......but we'd be adding a bunch of power to the lineup and still have three above avg starters. I would hope that if we're giving SD the kitchen sink, they'd be throwing in some veteran relief (that, as a rebuilding team, they should be willing to part with)

The truth is we dont know what AG will be like outside Petco. We can guess but not be sure. Hopefully we find out next year what he's like in a park like...say...US Cellular

Konerko would be LAA's way of replacing Vlad but maintaining some flexibility with finances for 2011. I think we'd have to give LAA money in the original permutation of the deal.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 03:14 PM) Yes, but it doesn't do you any good to weaken one strength to strengthen a weak area I might agree with you if not for our park. We're not a great defensive team, yet we're not a strikeout pitching staff either. I'd be a little more thrilled with a bunch of great groundball pitchers if and when we can actually pick up the ball. On top of all this, I still consider Peavy an unknown to some extent (I'm aware most dont). Right now we have a great park for hitters but not enough power. That absolutely has to be addressed, even if it means ending the dream of the 5-deep staff.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 03:09 PM) He carried SD too right to the bottom of the heap. One player isn't going to make our trip to the promise land especially if you trade away your prospects or top of the line pitchers My read on how we stand for 2010 season: We are standing with a mayyybe better staff than we had in 2005, and a way worse offense. You have to deal from a strength to get better. If you move Floyd, a little money is saved along the way which you can put back into the pile you can play with.

The more I think about this, I dont know how we can possibly get SD to do this with Hudson/Flowers being the top two outgoing names.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 03:00 PM) Pauly + Gavin > Gonzo, imo. Maybe in Year 1, but you have to consider Paulie's 2009 to be a last hurrah, sell-high situation. As far as Gavin, he's great but his departure still leaves you with a solid rotation..... and the big difference of having a sweet 2-3-4 in the lineup as opposed to two. And then you keep cheap farm talent on board for years.

I'm working on a permutation of this deal that sends GMJ to us...while we lessen the financial costs of that by sending out Gavin to SD and keeping a few prospects. Not that I want that to be the case but in my opinion LAA would be the hesitant party in the original deal.

Can Jared Mitchell be traded?

QUOTE (bobryansson @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 02:48 PM) Most, but not all, things that sound too good to be true.... This sounds too good to be true. Our farm system really did grow by leaps and bounds though. Also, you know SD has done their homework on all our youth based on the months of trade discussion from last year

I would give up Flowers in a heartbeat. AG is a rare talent...meanwhile, the downside options at catcher arent all that bad (new short term deal for AJP...or cheap defensive catchers, which we've been kind of waiting for anyway)

B&B ridicule message boards and then of course unknowingly share info from message boards all the time. Except for that one aging old man mystery source Boers has with the Bulls, I dont know that anyone of consequence talks to these two guys. But they are still entertaining.

Bernstein on the Score: after break they'll talk about a 'rumored blockbuster trade' and 'give the latest'

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 02:08 PM) That really means next to nothing.My point wasnt actually all that sweeping. That as things stand, he would play. It'd be him versus Kotsay for an OF spot, and even at that there'd be a DH role open. It actually matters since if you are forced to take Matthews, you have little room left to spend on those two lineup spots. JorDanks or Pods maybe if you can afford him

You could bring back Pods for DH and have some much improved defensive outfield with CQ/Rios/Kotsay. Would need right handed bench hitting though.

Simon Cowell is probably gonna be extra douchey next year

Probably the scariest thing about GMJ inclusion here...as things stand he would actually... play for the Sox. 2009 - runners on: .326/.433 in 141 ABs.....scoring position w/ 2 out: .395/.519 in 43 at-bats. 4 of 7 w/ bases loaded. Granted being in that lineup gets you some pitches to hit all year. He was atrocious w/ bases empty.

I apologize for the use of said term. Just point being we traded Allen for someone who is about to be 28 and has career ERA of 4.00, mostly in the national league.Semantics i guess For the record though I dont think Allen is super either.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 01:45 PM) Shouldn't we wait to see if Allen turns out to be the next Chris Young first? I'm totally in agreement that said people shouldnt overreact. But point being I think that Allen deal was the one prospect we'll deal for a low ceiling guy. Hudson and Flowers wont go anywhere unless it's a knockout punch. I could be wrong.

QUOTE (elrockinMT @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 01:41 PM) I cringe everytime we talk about Sox prospects being dealt. B.Allen being dealt hurt many people, but I honestly think the current prospects, being positions always in need (hudson, flowers) will be dealt only for a real prize

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Nov 16, 2009 -> 01:33 PM) The source is legit. Phew