beck72

QUOTE (knightni @ Aug 8, 2009 -> 01:10 PM) Fields might make it through... I'm sure the sox have put some names through waivers and they'd know who cleared and didn't. Fields' name was probably out there. Whoever the sox "trade" for Rios, wouldn't be on the sox "3 year board".

QUOTE (chisox2334 @ Aug 8, 2009 -> 01:06 PM) It would be great for the future. But, a logjam in outfield will not make any of three current starters happy. It will because it would allow them to rest. It's been a long season, where in the heat of the summer, and guys like Pods, Dye, Thome, and Quentin [coming back from his injury] need days off. Being fresh for the next month and a half would make everyone happy, as long as the sox are winning.

QUOTE (knightni @ Aug 8, 2009 -> 12:57 PM) Fields would be perfect to send to Toronto. Except he wouldn't make it through waivers. I'd look for guys having good years who probably wouldn't have a spot on the sox-Justin Cassel, Stefan Gartrell, CJ Retherford, one of the sox thirdbasemen in the lower minors [Gilmore or Morel]. 2-3 guys who Toronto could use, and that would have them chip in some cash in a deal.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 8, 2009 -> 09:54 AM) The only problem I have with acquiring a guy like Rios is the intangible factor; it wasn't long ago that his name was brought up as a potential trade candidate, and someone posted a video to him on YouTube. IIRC, Rios was mentioned in deals [with maybe Riccardi testing the trade market for him], but it was before the Jays decided to sign him long term. That the Jays did lock him up, even after they had signed Wells to a mega deal, IMO, shows they didn't have concerns regarding Rios' "intangibles". If there were other reasons not to sign Rios long term, such as character, etc, the Jays could very well have traded Rios in a deal that netted them a solid return and pointed to Wells' deal as the reason they couldn't afford him. BTW, the video looks like it was shot in NYC. The paparazzi, and the "fans" calling him a bum, don't seem to be hometown toronto guys. Nothing in Rios' response raises red flags for me.

QUOTE (BlackBetsy @ Aug 8, 2009 -> 01:42 AM) That's a pretty bad worst case scenario, given the way the Sox run their finances. The Yankees can absorb a contract like that. The Sox can't easily, especially now that they've picked up Peavy's deal. Looking at next year's free agents, and even after 2010, there aren't a lot of options for the sox to spend their money on. It makes sense to spend on a guy like Rios who has had a very good track record of performance. That's why the Peavy deal also made sense.

I could see the Sox working out a deal with Tor. with some lower level but decent prospects for 2 reasons: 1] to help Tor. save face with their fan base; and 2] to get Tor. to kick in some money. Tor. isn't likely to just let him walk for nothing, even if they want to get out from under Rios' contract. Rios would seem to fit in with what the sox want to do, and with how Kenny operates: improve their defense, get younger and more versatile on offense, and would seem to be a good bet to rebound coming off a down year. His last three years, he's avg'd a .296 avg, .347 OBP, and a .489 SLG. His last 2 years he had 70+ extra base hits. I would have no problem with the Sox getting Rios. It would help them win now and in the next few years. The OF could start 2010 with Pods in LF, Rios in CF, and Carlos in RF. Jordan Danks could possibly be ready to step in should someone go down to injury. Chone Figgins, who would be hard to sign anyway, is likely to get a 3, 4 yr deal with money similar to what Rios is making.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Aug 7, 2009 -> 11:54 PM) Yes, if they were the team that actually won the claim. From the sounds of it, on ESPN.com, only one team made a claim on him. That team could be "stuck" with Rios, and his entire contract. No deal has to be worked out. Toronto could just walk away.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but can the sox basically acquire Rios for no prospects, just the $60 mill, remaining on his contract, if Toronto wants to shed payroll?

QUOTE (South Side Fireworks Man @ Aug 7, 2009 -> 11:23 PM) Rios would fit in nicely. For the rest of this season Ozzie could work Rios in by DHing Quentin on some days and have Pods LF, Rios CF, and Dye RF. Other days he can rest Pods and have an OF of Quentin, Rios and Dye. Still other days he can sit Dye or DH him and have Q in LF, Pods in CF and Rios in RF. Still other days Rios can sit on the bench in place of Wise and come in as a defensive replacement when Buerhle has another perfect game going. I agree. I made a thread that it made sense for the sox to trade for an OFer by the deadline. My main reasons were to rest Thome, Dye, Pk, Pods, and Quentin. Kotsay made some sense and does fit the profile. But I meant a real OFer. Rios would be nice for the sox.

QUOTE (SoxFan101 @ Aug 7, 2009 -> 05:23 PM) Is he under contract next season? Otherwise we are only paying for 2 months of that contract, so if the Mets just paid for a little of it, wouldnt be too bad. There is a team option for $8 mill for 2010, with a $1 mill. buyout.

Quentin has looked much better as of late. He's starting to look dangerous at the plate. I expect him to hit well [not 2008 levels] if he's healthy.

I guess it would depend on how much money the Mets would send with. The cash for this year, and next year's $1 mill. buyout would total $3.75 mill. I don't think any team would pay Wagner $8 mill for 2010. I don't see it personally. But stranger things have happened.

The question is relevant because at the end of the year, the sox have to decide upon Thome or Dye for DH next year and beyond. Do you go with Thome's OBP, or Dye's higher avg, factoring in the age difference, and the sox lack of Lefty power hitters?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 5, 2009 -> 12:30 PM) I read the other day there are only 4 players 36 or older that also play the field that have enough at bats to qualify for the batting title. I think JD turns 36 fairly soon. If you were to sign him to an extension, it would almost have to be to DH. Definitely. And a case could be made that JD's offensive numbers would improve with the extra rest that he'd get being the DH, too.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 4, 2009 -> 12:20 PM) First off the "Thome's bat looks real slow" is tired and false. The guy is on a pace where if he had 500 AB he'd have 35 homers 115 rbi and an OBP near .400. Anyone else does that and they are godly around here. If I were the White Sox, I certainly would wait until the end of the year to decide on JD. I don't know if he would be agreeable to an extension and thus terminating his option. He may not go for it. As to Figgins, I've love this guy for a few years, but he has been hurt a lot and now during his contract year, he's come up huge. Considering his age and how his game is based on his legs, the only way I'd sign him is if you could get a deal like some who signed last year had to sign for, guys like Cabrera and Hudson and Abreu. I think paying him based on this season and giving him multiple years would be regrettable. A few things: *Thome has looked like an easy out lately, with an increased K rate and hasn't been making hard contact. Maybe it has to do with his back acting up. But Jim, in the last 2 years, has become a .250 hitter, with a .385 OBP, and a SLG % under .500. I'm not saying that isn't valuable. But with his injury history, his turning 39 later this month, needing a few days off each week, and an arguably better overall alternative in Jermaine Dye who could DH, I don't forsee a spot for Jim on the 2010 Sox. Replacing Dye's glove in RF would also help the sox defense. *Do the sox invest in Dye for 3 years, with the thought that he'd be the DH? With the extra year, the sox could get a lower yearly salary, like 3 years at $7.5 mill. per. If they offered him a 2 year, they'd have to up the yearly salary closer to something like $9 mill. per. *I really liked Figgins for 3b, prior to Gordon establishing himself there. Figgins for CF might not be the best use of him. But if the sox want to move Gordon to SS [which would only be accomplished with a trade of Alexei--not the craziest of ideas, with Alexei only sporting a .727 OPS] Figgins would probably be worth a 3, 4 year deal at 3b. *Re-signing Pods for LF and to hit leadoff in 2010 would be likely. Though the sox don't have a backup plan should he get injured. A top 2 of Pods + Figgins would set up the middle of the order rather nicely.

With all the talk of "assets", "worth", "value", etc. excluded is that Beckham and Getz are baseball players, who know the game, play it the right way, and have instincts you can't teach. You can't have too many of these type players, no matter the power numbers they may or may not provide. The sox have been criticized for exactly that--not having enough players who are baseball smart and savvy, who can make contact off the best pitcher's and not get mowed down on 3 strikes like Uribe, BA, Fields. Beckham isn't going to be moved from 3b in the next few years, as long as Alexei is on the team. We can talk about it here. But it's pretty clear nothing has been mentioned to that effect except the opposite-that Alexei will play SS as long as he's here. So, do you acquire someone to replace Getz? Fine, who and kind of production can he give the sox? Will that production better the 2009 numbers? That might be easy. But can the sox find someone who can better the improved numbers that Getz in 2010 should give, such as a .280 avg. and have a .350 OBP. ? I don't see it. IMO, it's better to shore up the bullpen, and the OF, esp. CF. CF is the spot to target and improve upon-both offensively and defensively. I see Pods in LF, Q in RF and Dye at DH.

A Dye deal for 2 years, $16 mill would be worth it to have him DH. Thome's bat looks real slow these days. I don't see him retiring. But the sox should prob. move on. Get Figgins and the sox OF can be Pods in LF, Figgins in CF, and Q in RF.

I'll say no to trading Jenks. The sox don't have a viable replacement and trading for one would likely be steep in terms of talent. With guys like Thornton, Carrasco and Pena pretty cheap, the sox can pay Jenks his next $5+ mill arb. number I say no to Webb. The sox 5th SP should come from within the sox org, like Torres, Hudson. Paulie has shown when healthy what he can do. He's having a very good year at the plate and in the field. AJ also brings more to the sox than most people realize-both on the field and off.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 4, 2009 -> 02:48 AM) If all three were on the market (including Fields), Josh would bring the most back in return, by far. Not a chance. Getz is an everyday player. Fields and Nix are not. Unless this statement was backdated to October 2007, then you might have something.

Threads like these show the credibility of some posters. Esp. when people were going gaga over Josh Fields "hot" streak.

QUOTE (beautox @ Aug 3, 2009 -> 10:18 AM) I agree with all of you, but when you have Beckham producing like ryan zimmerman/evan longoria at the plate and a solid cheap option at 2B, i would say keep it the way it is especially if Getz can make the adjustments you spoke of letting the inside pitch go by for a ball or turning on it or taking a very balanced approach at the plate and going with what they give you and develop into that 750-770Ops player. Chris could soldify 2B and hit #1-2 in the line up for a long time coming. I think the way things are right now with Viciedo looking to be the heir apparent to konerko there is no reason to move beckham outside of his bat being elite in the MI(which would be awesome) but then you've got to worry about the CI, we've got Morel and Viciedo. If anything one more year at 3B to truly see what we have in Getz, Viciedo and Morel will not hurt his ability to convert back to 2B/SS. I'm not against moving getz it just seems he fits the mold of player this organization has for so long tried to develop and have at the major league level. Exactly. Why move Beckham when he's improving in the field. It's not like he's pulling a Ryan Braun, and being a butcher in the field. And if the sox keep Alexei at SS, they wouldn't have Gordon learn another new position at 2b. Getz is doing things exactly the way the sox want [except for bunting and making rookie fielding mistakes]--stealing bases, hitting good pitchers' pitches, making contact, hitting for avg. He'll be fine going forward at 2b, which would allow the sox to keep the IF set the way it is.

QUOTE (Voros @ Aug 3, 2009 -> 07:43 AM) If that were really true, ARod wouldn't have been the one who mas moved. The idea behind Beckham playing a more important defensive position like SS or 2B is that theoretically if Beckham is as good a defender at those positions as he is at 3B, average fielding third basemen tend to be better hitters than average fielding second baseman. In the case specifically of the White Sox, the presence of Viciedo only enhances that point. Getz is a nifty little player, but he's not real young and his upside with the stick looks like maybe .280/.350/.400. If it's that or Josh Fields, Getz looks not too bad. But otherwise you might want to consider trying to upgrade the offense there. The big problem I see is one of timing. Skills not used tend to disintegrate. If Beckham is ultimately not going to play third, it would be a mistake to leave him there much longer past this season. There was a time when Chipper Jones was probably a better defensive shortstop than a defensive third baseman. Obviously that's likely not the case anymore. Welcome aboard Before the sox traded for Peavy, I was on board the sox trading Alexei in the offseason to acquire a top young starter [say like Clay Bucholz sp?] from the Red Sox. That was dependent on the sox signing Chone for Figgins for 3b, and would allow Gordon to play SS. Now, I don't see any reason to move Alexei. And seeing that Alexei is a better SS than Beckham, the next 2 years at least are covered at SS. Yet with the SP locked in, SS covered, and no heir apparent for 3b [Viciedo isn't ready, and may not be at 3b in the bigs] it makes a ton of sense to keep Gordon at 3b. I don't buy the argument that his bat would be better at SS or 2b. If the sox get more power production out of SS than is typical, which they do, keeping the same infield is fine going forward.

This is a giant step towards having an elite, dominating starting rotation, esp. playing in the AL Central. This deal was a no brainer, having only taken the sox 5th starter off the 25 man roster. Now the sox can focus on adding position players in the system [via free agency, like Figgins or in the minors, with Danks, Flowers, Dayan], to get that balanced team that has been missing, that could be ready to compete with anyone.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 1, 2009 -> 08:45 AM) Until Peavy blows out his elbow, misses 18 months and we all say it was the worst trade of his tenure, lol....when the Sox couldn't find a fifth starter down the stretch in a very winnable division and Peavy is unable to come back. Let's hope we never have to read a thread about that eventuality. Even if that did happen, this would still be a good deal. That's because the sox are trying to control the AL Central and potentially be dominant for the next 3, 4 years. No one can predict the future. But Peavy's track record suggests he's durable. There's risk involved in any deal. Yet the upside outweighs the risk.

Washburn should perform better than Porcello. Yet I think both Washburn and Edwin Jackson are due for a letdown. Verlander is still the only one the Tigers can truly count on. An upgrade for the Tigers. Yet I have a hard time seeing Washburn keep up his numbers. And this hurts the Tigers in the future. They didn't have much in the minors as it was. This further depletes them.