scenario

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 3, 2008 -> 01:02 AM) I thought that type A was 2 picks. We get their pick, and a sandwich pick? Yep.

QUOTE (knightni @ Dec 3, 2008 -> 12:17 AM) If the Twins sign OC, they have to give the Sox their draft picks, right? We would get their first rounder.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 3, 2008 -> 12:32 AM) I'd much rather have Morton but there's something to hope for out of Reyes too. So... something Braves fans should look forward to then... since neither of them are coming to the WhiteSox in this deal.

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Dec 2, 2008 -> 11:47 PM) Uh-oh Even Flowers is questioning his long term position at C. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...,0,628845.story I think it's more that it gives him > than 1 path to get to MLB... A problem he was probably sensitive to, being blocked as a catcher in the Atlanta organization.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 2, 2008 -> 11:01 PM) Javy and Boone truly suck, but as far as what we got in return. Let's see. I can't imagine we acquired very good prospects. Traditionally the Braves have been a smart organization. Javy is trash and so is Boone. You're so predictably negative sometimes. "Our guys were trash. The other team is smart. So the guys we got must not be good." LOL. Good news... the guys we got are pretty good. So, you can relax. We didn't get ripped off.

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Dec 2, 2008 -> 10:48 PM) If I were to guess, we'll have 4 prospects in the top 50. Beckham, Viciedo, Flowers, and Poreda. My top 10: 1.) Beckham 2.) Poreda 3.) Viciedo 4.) Flowers 5.) Danks 6.) Lillibridge 7.) Allen 8.) Getz 9.) Shelby 10.) Gilmore The most impressive part of that... only 1 pitcher. And we have some pretty good pitching talent in the system. When was the last time we had 9 position players good enough to qualify among our top 10 prospects.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Dec 2, 2008 -> 10:50 PM) To the person on here who is a minor league expert ... please give us the accurate lowdown on these guys we acquired. We did good.

I've been thinking about this deal for a few hours now... And I wouldn't be surprised if we end up flipping Lillibridge to Oakland if they lose out in the Furcal sweepstakes. They've got boatloads of pitching and a hole at short.

QUOTE (kwolf68 @ Dec 2, 2008 -> 09:58 PM) I so wish Flowers was a great CATCHING prospect and not just a 'catcher' that can hit. Anyone in the know think he will actually ever catch in the bigs or is he a 1st baseman type in waiting? He just finished a season in the Carolina League. That means he'll be in Birmingham (AA) in 2009. So... there's time to work on his defense. Meanwhile, his offensive skills are really advanced for his age. He literally destroyed pitching in the AFL this fall... an all-star league with most MLB teams' best pitching prospects... and that's a beautiful thing.

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Dec 2, 2008 -> 09:54 PM) BTW, Flowers confirmed the deal himself to an ATL writer, pending physicals. I am soooo happy about picking him up, I can't stand it. The guy has offensive stud written all over him.

If today's trade happens with the players suggested... Our farm system is going to be looking pretty d*** good next season.

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Dec 2, 2008 -> 09:33 PM) The ESPN News ticker says Jo Jo Reyes is involved. Old news. No longer applicable but still circulating on some sites.

I think Lillibridge is a very good player who we were fortunate to pick up on a bounce. Scouting reports suggest he profiles as an ideal #2 hitter. 10-15 homerun power with above average OBP potential. Serious wheels... 40-50 stolen bases per year. Very good defensive SS with a plus arm. (One report called him 'Khalil Greene lite with better OBP'.) He moved through the minors pretty quickly, but hit a snag this year moving back and forth between AAA and the majors. Maybe this turns out to be a Kenny-special.

Flowers was one of my favorite players in minor league baseball this year. I will be very happy if he is in this deal.

Good mlb.com article about Beckham. A few very interesting notes.

QUOTE (R.J. @ Dec 2, 2008 -> 05:52 PM) Lillibridge/Flowers/Reyes would have been a pretty sweet return. Lillibridge/Flowers/Someone-less-valuable makes it more of a salary dump. Not necessarily. The Braves have some very good young arms in their system.

QUOTE (Tony82087 @ Dec 2, 2008 -> 05:48 PM) So Rosey says Reyes is NOT in the deal. Correct.

The latest Rosenthal update says we are getting a pitcher in the deal but it is not going to be Jo-Jo Reyes.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 11:55 PM) That's right, I do know very little about the years spent mashing the mush. I know the Red Sox value his opinions and statistical mashed potatoes quite highly... The research is really good and worth the time of a serious baseball fan like yourself to learn more about. It's not statistical mush... It's good science that debunks alot of old misguided myths about what factors contribute to baseball success.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 11:15 PM) Do your ranking by OBP and he's not in that group over his career. Last year he probably is, but last year was not the norm for him. You're right. Ranked by OBP he would be #51 on that list of 199 players (lowest to highest OBP). But I'm just not impressed with a player who has a .331 career OBP and absolutely no power. IMO that's not good. And I pray to the baseball gods that Kenny will keep looking for a better alternative.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 11:07 PM) It's not that OPS is meaningless for a leadoff hitter, it's that it's not as good of a pure metric to measure their production like it is for a middle of the order type hitter. It doesn't tell you everything by itself, the SLG part of it means something, but the OBP (and walk ratio) is more important than the SLG. Absolutely right! I agree 100%. We could live with a low SLG out of a player if he had a high OBP. But a player who doesn't do either very well??? Whew... I just think we should keep looking.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 10:58 PM) Your list is a joke. I just counted, and you've got 2 3B who aren't starters (Counsell, Castillo), 6 catchers, 9 SS, 3 CF, 2 2B, and 3 LF who aren't starters anymore (Payton, Pierre, Pods). Who would've thought that you'd come up with a bunch of players playing premium positions when you ranked according to OPS? Big surprise there... And yes, Taveras would make the Sox a better offensive team than what we have now because he adds an element to the game that we are missing. Like I said in my original post... it's a list of all MLB players who had 1500 or more plate appearances in the 4 years from 2005-2008. I just picked the bottom 25 for the table. There was no cherry picking or data twisting involved. By setting the threshold of plate appearances lower, it generated a list of 199 players including most starting players over the last 4 years. Then I ranked them ALL by OPS. So if you don't see any other leadoff hitters in here, it's simply because their OPS was high enough so they were not in the bottom 25. Bottom line: Taveras was #6. NUMBER SIX. You want him for you leadoff man? Good for you. I don't. I think he sucks... and the data seems to support my opinion.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 10:25 PM) More stupidity... Obviously he'll rank at the very bottom in a stat that accounts for a tool he does not possess, and a tool which BTW is completely unrelated to his job as lead-off man. How stupid are you people? Listen... I don't know what you think you know... but ix-nay with the upid-stay. You obviously like Taveras, but that is not a good reason to take shots at people making reasonable arguments. OPS is a well established measure of offensive output. The fact is that players who score low in OPS have to do something else extremely valuable to justify their spot in a lineup. If it didn't mean anything for a leadoff hitter, then where are the other leadoff hitters on the list? In fact, where are the other 'good' offensive players? The fact is that practically every player on that list is considered 'marginal' as a starter... because of their low offensive output. It's a list that seems made up of defensive specialists and journeymen. Is there ANYbody on that list who would make the Sox a better offensive team? I don't think so.

Here's a search I did of all MLB players since 2005... with a minimum of 1500 plate appearances... ranked by OPS (from lowest to highest). So... here are the 25 MLB regulars with the lowest OPS... with the worst shown first. Read into it what you want...

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Dec 1, 2008 -> 04:36 PM) Getz will wear the label (like Miles, like Eckstein, Adam Kennedy, Aviles, McEwing, etc.) of being "scrappy" and a grinder, but he doesn't really have one "plus" tool. (Maybe some will argue he will consistently be a .300+ hitter like Aviles MIGHT be...) Taveras has two and arguably three, his speed, defense and arm from CF. I guess you can still make the same argument for Brian Anderson....that he has 2-3 legit "plus" tools (defense and power), which is probably why KW hasn't given up on him quite yet. Who would you rather have as a leadoff hitter? A guy with plus speed and a great batting eye who getz on base? Or a guy with ++ speed, strong defense, and a great arm? IMO, Taveras has one problem that makes him ill equipped for the job.... he's not a good hitter. And I'm not terribly excited about making a guy whose claim to fame is good defense our next leadoff hitter. Frankly, I don't see Taveras as being a significant upgrade over Owens. In fact, I think it's likely Owens could turn out to be a better offensive player. I'm not a huge Anderson fan either, but I would put Brian out there in a second instead of Taveras as our starting CF. (I suppose you could guess I'm not much a Taveras fan, eh?)