harfman77

QUOTE(beck72 @ Dec 31, 2006 -> 05:54 AM) The "die hards" [like on White Sox weekly, who made me wince with their comments] are the ones moaning and groaning that the sox are "white-flagging" it [They aren't the newbies but guys and gals who can remember who was actually involved in the original trade]. These are the people worried the sox are doing the trades for financial reasons, and not for baseball related reasons. They are naturally suspicious that the moves are being made to 'make a profit'. I disagree, with them. But I can see their points. I think the Sox are making these trades for financial reasons. Getting these young starters in gives the Sox flexibility to trade the more expensive starters down the road and gives Sox payroll flexibility for signing replacements for Dye and Thome if/when they leave. I would rather see MB dealt to the Yanks if they trade Randy Johnson. I think a package of Clippard, Cabrera, and Tabata would really solidy the Sox for a while and keep us contending now. Cabrera could be the everyday left fielder right now and has played all three OF positions. Tabata is couple years away but will be an impact player. Clippard should be a good middle of the rotation starter that is 1-2 years away.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Dec 27, 2006 -> 09:29 PM) Seeing how the Cardinals and Rangers are offering somewhere in the neighborhood of $12M-$14M over 2 years the Sox would probably have to go to $15M just to get him interested. That's what? $15M for 9 months (at the most) of Mark Mulder. That would mean paying him about $5M in '07 and $10M in '08? How is that cheap? That's an insane gamble for someone as questionable as Mulder. You can say he's cheap over and over until you actually break the money down. In the current market, that ends up being pretty cheap. See Gil Meche - Ted Lilly

QUOTE(NCsoxfan @ Dec 27, 2006 -> 05:57 PM) It is not certain that he is washed up at all - who knows how he will come back... And who's to say that his decline has been due to the injury, I know that he was out this year with the injury, but he may have been battling it for a while. With almost a year off to recover he could be back into his Oakland form, or he might stink, buts its a gamble that is worth taking.

QUOTE(NCsoxfan @ Dec 27, 2006 -> 12:26 PM) The point is that you can sign a potential All-Star at a much discounted price. And how is it directly delay the development of a young pitcher if he isn't even ready until mid-year? That would allow an arm to be traded mid-season if Mulder is pitching great, or for Mulder to step in if the young guys are not doing well. What are the odds he ends up pitching at his old level? Who knows. But IMO, it is worth the 2 year investment. I completely agree. I think a contract that is like $5 mil next season, $9 mil in 2008 with $12 mil team options for 09-10 would be a good contract for the Sox, if he returns to form he earns some money if not the Sox invest some in him and use him as the long reliever is for a couple years.

Trade for Melky Cabrera, switch hitter who can play all three outfield positions.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Dec 19, 2006 -> 09:35 PM) I would love to have Miguel Cabrera as a back up OF. I take it Early 90's Griffey Jr. is in Center and the Rickey Hernderson from the 80's is in left? Since the conversation was about how the Yankees now have an expendable outfielder, and Melky is the only Cabrera that plays outfield for the Yankees, and has been mentioned in trade talks with the Pirates recently. Yeah I meant Melky.

I would look into trading for Cabrera instead.

I would do it in a heartbeat. Jones is the best player at his position in baseball. The opportunity to sign him would be there and if we feel we have no shot we can move him for prospects (a much better package that we would get for MB) by July 31st. Basically you are trading for sole negoitiating rights until the deadline, after that if you are not able to sign him at 6 for $120 mil, which will be the market rate after the Wells deal, you move him to someone for prospects

QUOTE(Felix @ Dec 17, 2006 -> 10:39 AM) I didn't know Ross posted on this board, wow. Sorry to hear about you getting traded, good luck in KC I love the trade, you move a situational player for a lefty with a ton of upside. Gload has peaked and would never see regular time in this lineup.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 04:27 PM) BMac is not a rookie first of all, and Hughes is either basically ready for the big leagues or will be within a couple months. It's not a bad thing to have youth in your rotation if it is the right youth, and those two would be beautiful. But yeah, the Yankees wouldn't do that. What about Sanchez instead of Hughes?

QUOTE(bkmoney @ Dec 14, 2006 -> 04:14 PM) So.. how do we get Arod to agree to this. Tell him he doesnt have to play in NY anymore

Since we know Garland was almost on a plane to Houston and Crede has been shopped and will be until he is signed; coupled with the fact that KW has been rumored to be all over ARod, here is my baseless trade of pure speculation. Garland, Broadway and Crede for Arod, Cabrera and Hughes. Trading Garland effectively dumps $20 mil from last years salary with Freddy being dealt so Arod would cost another 5. Cabrera I thought was impressive as a rookie last season is a switch hitter who could our every day left fielder after coming up as a centerfielder. Hughes would be a prospect that Kenny has said he wants back in any trade of a starter, though he is probably two years away instead of one. I know that opens the fifth starter slot, but I see that as a good thing. It allows our young guys - Haeger, Floyd, Phillips, Gonzalez, Broadway or even Tracey an opportunity to get experience and be ready to move into the rotation in the event of another starter getting injured or leaving via trade or free agency. Could add some of those pieces to the trade to add Humberto Sanchez and use him as the fifth starter. I think the Skanks would probably do it if we took all of Arods contract. Just a thought cause I am bored waiting for something to happen.

You can sign him and he competes with the five guys in triple A for the long relief role at the big club. If he sucks, he can be released if you sign him to a minor league contract. No risk, maybe some reward. He has always had flashes where he shows promise, then implodes. I think it is worth bringing him and taking a look.

Having our top 4 starters next year 1. Count 2. MB 3. Vazquez/Garland whichever is not traded 4. BMac Is still a lot better than what most of the rest of the league will have. I think it is a good time to look at moving another starter if the value is there. KW should listen to any offer on any of them because right now any of those five are expendable at a price. If we are going to compete on a consistent basis we are going to have to build depth in the system, and since we have not been able to bring in enought talent through the draft or signing international players we will need to stock up through trades. With an offense that is as prolific as ours now is the time to take a step back in the fifth starter position if it can provide better prospects to the system to keep us competitive over a longer period of time.

QUOTE(Vance Law @ Nov 28, 2006 -> 03:47 PM) Whenever anyone in this thread says they don't see why this is a bad deal for the Angels and then proceeds to rattle of Garcia, Crede, and Santana's career and or '06 numbers they fail to address the very pertinent issue of the # of years the players are under contract and their salaries. Making the argument that "this is Freddie's ERA over the past x years, while Santana's is this, and look at how bad he was on the road," doesn't work if it doesn't also address "and the Angels only get Garcia for 1 year for $10 million and the Sox get Santana for 4 years for x hundred thousand dollars/year. " There are a ton of variables in the equation of this trade: past performance, potential future performance, current salary, # of years under contract, team need, etc., as some people have accurately pointed out in the thread. Either way, it's a crap deal for the Sox, and I'm glad Kenny sees it that way. If it were Santana for Garcia straight up, I'd say yeah, do it please. But throwing in 2 years of Crede and only getting in return a slight upgrade (or possible downgrade) on Podsednik who we've already got if we want, is unacceptable. I agree, thats why Anaheim needs to include prospects that will update our sytem. Adenhart may be the best pitcher in A ball, but that is a ways from the bigs. They will be more likely to give him up then a major league ready player in Saunders. A lot of us are down on Tracey, but he is still a decent prospect. The way this deal breaks down for me is that the Sox are dealing one of the best big game pitchers in baseball and the best 3rd basemen in the AL last season for a young pitcher with potential to be very good and a utility player. That does not bring enough back for me regardless of contract length.

QUOTE(Vance Law @ Nov 28, 2006 -> 03:47 PM) Whenever anyone in this thread says they don't see why this is a bad deal for the Angels and then proceeds to rattle of Garcia, Crede, and Santana's career and or '06 numbers they fail to address the very pertinent issue of the # of years the players are under contract and their salaries. Making the argument that "this is Freddie's ERA over the past x years, while Santana's is this, and look at how bad he was on the road," doesn't work if it doesn't also address "and the Angels only get Garcia for 1 year for $10 million and the Sox get Santana for 4 years for x hundred thousand dollars/year. " There are a ton of variables in the equation of this trade: past performance, potential future performance, current salary, # of years under contract, team need, etc., as some people have accurately pointed out in the thread. Either way, it's a crap deal for the Sox, and I'm glad Kenny sees it that way. If it were Santana for Garcia straight up, I'd say yeah, do it please. But throwing in 2 years of Crede and only getting in return a slight upgrade (or possible downgrade) on Podsednik who we've already got if we want, is unacceptable. I agree, thats why Anaheim needs to include prospects that will update our sytem. Adenhart may be the best pitcher in A ball, but that is a ways from the bigs. They will be more likely to give him up then a major league ready player in Saunders. A lot of us are down on Tracey, but he is still a decent prospect. The way this deal breaks down for me is that the Sox are dealing one of the best big game pitchers in baseball and the best 3rd basemen in the AL last season for a young pitcher with potential to be very good and a utility player. That does not bring enough back for me regardless of contract length.

Where does Bonds play? He has worse defense than Pods and we already have a LH DH. Plus Bonds can barely run the bases at all. He is not an option because he doesnt fit a need on the team, unless he is a pinch hitter off the bench QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Nov 28, 2006 -> 03:39 PM) Garcia/Buehrle + ______ + ______. Fill in the blanks. Broadway? Uribe, and then our Sox go out and sign Lugo? :shrug Izturis Cedeno and Jacque Jones

Crede Garcia and Tracey

The price will go up for the starters once the quality free agents sign, if that doesnt happen until half way through spring training that is fine with me as long as we can get a quality return. Right now you have 10-12 teams pursuing one started or another in free agency, therefore they have no incentive to make a deal because there is a chance they can still get their guy. Once that guy signs with someone else, the 9-11 teams that were not able to sign the player will have to fall back to plan B and looking for a player in a trade. There is plenty of time left to make a move and the more money that these free agents sign for, the better our players value will be in a trade. Patience.

QUOTE(R.Sweeney @ Nov 22, 2006 -> 04:46 PM) Your exactly right. Thats what Detroit has been doing the last few years. Get quality draft picks and get good players in return through trades. Oh yeah, lets not forget about Beane in Oakland too. The problem is identifying and then drafting the quality players. It is one thing to have the picks, it is another to get good value from them.

QUOTE(R.Sweeney @ Nov 22, 2006 -> 04:51 PM) Oh, I havent heard that. Well that could be a scenerio. Could be used as part of a three-way too. From ESPN "No movement on the D-Train Nov 14 - The Marlins aren't expected to dangle Dontrelle Willis as trade bait just yet, the Palm Beach Post reports. Despite speculation that the left-hander could be moved, a National League general manager said that the Fish are telling teams that Willis is not available. Before Florida parts with Willis, the club will try to move pitchers such as Sergio Mitre, Jason Vargas or Yusmeiro Petit. "

QUOTE(R.Sweeney @ Nov 22, 2006 -> 04:38 PM) The only prob. is that from what ive heard Florida is high on Petit but Im sure they would like to have Fields so who knows. On second thought we might need Fields, oh s***! ESPN is reporting that the Marlins are shopping those two right now

1. Sign Octavio Dotel - he should come with a reasonable price tag after his recovery season and is a low risk-high reward acquisition. If he returns to form he can spell Jenks and be a dominant set up man, if not he is a passable middle relief option. 2. Acquire Carl Crawford - Sending BA to the Marlins for a package of pitching prospects and then turning them with Fields to the Rays for Crawford should be enough to get that deal done. 3. Move a starting pitcher - Garland to the Rangers - Freddy to the Angels - Javier to the Mets Actually just do them all

QUOTE(R.Sweeney @ Nov 22, 2006 -> 04:29 PM) I like the idea accept we keep BMc and send petit packing. Petit's #s dont look too impressive, in fact pund for pound Broadway had better #s. Sounds good to me

It better be a couple prospects if that is the deal and one of their names better start with Howie and end with Kendrick.