beck72

Here's a write up on Feldman from Baseball AMerica's 2006 Prospect handbook: #15 prospect "Feldman's fastball velocity increased from 88-90 mph early in the yr [2005] to 91-93 by the time he received a mid-August callup to Texas. His fastball has plus life and good sink, inducing bushels of groundballs. He has a loose whippy arm and a deceptive sidearm delivery. He shows plus-plus command against righties moving the ball around the zone but typically keeping it down. Feldman compliments his fastball with an average sweeping slider. He also has a changeup to employ against lefties as a show pitch. He still needs to improve at getting lefties out, and the Rangers think he eventually will become a middle reliever. For now, he figures to be aright-on-right specialist for Texas" Sounds like Chad Bradford, but about 10 years younger and $15 million cheaper.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Nov 19, 2006 -> 01:04 AM) If 'bullpen arm' equals Massett and 'others' equals Hurley, then I'd say you're onto something. Not directly related to this topic, but earlier on ESPN News there was a segment on the Angels persuing Zito. If Anaheim could land Zito it helps us tremendously with Texas and New York. Mets may be pushed into a bidding war with Texas if they feel they're close. That's atleast what I hope. If Glavine leaves for Atlanta it would be even better. The sox should get Danks and another SP prospect. But I'm talking about an arm that can step right in for 2007. Besides their closer--which isn't happening-- Scott Feldman looks like a possible arm the sox could or should want included in any deal. He's a 23 yr old RHP who had a 3.92 ERA and a 2.30+ GB/ FB ratio in 41 IP for texas last year. http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/F/Scott-Feldman.shtml

Well it sounds like both JAvy and Freddy might stay. Dealing Garland would certainly return more than both the guys mentioned in this thread. Which seemed to be the consensus--deal the guy who could bring the greatest return. BTW, arguing over who is better--Javy or Freddy--is pointless. There are far better ways to spend an evening

Have any names been mentioned, besides Anderson and Garland for Danks, etc? I'd have to say a bullpen guy from the Rangers along with Danks and others.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Nov 18, 2006 -> 02:13 PM) All depends on the return. You'd expect to get more for Javy because he's signed for longer, and I would expect if Javy stayed with the Sox that he would continually improve under Coop and become more consistent. If trading a Javy gets you a Hurley or Pelfrey, by all means do that deal. I'd put Danks just in a lower tier (although I still love him as a prospect, because he offers you something that we don't have, a potential dominant lefty starter) below those 2. Out of the 2 scenarios there Beck, the 1st one certainly sounds more beneficial for us. From the sounds of it, Tex. or the Mets could give the sox that kind of top prospect for Javy. The sox should get someone who could step right in the rotation mid season or definitely in 2008 for Javy. That is less likely in a deal for Freddy

I started this a bit in the "Freddy to the Angels?" thread. But it got me thinking. At first glance, trading Freddy would seem a no-brainer. He didn't look the same pitcher he was in 2005 for most of 06. He'll be a FA after '07. And Javy has two more years with the sox, and has far better pure "stuff" than Freddy. And he started coming around at the end. But, if the sox do trade Freddy, what can they realistically expect in return? Not the same prospects that trading Javy could. The sox could probably get for Freddy a decent SP prospect like Tyler Clippard from the Yanks and a bullpen guy--maybe Chris Britton who the yanks got from the O's, and maybe a lower level prospect. Yet if the sox traded Vazquez, they likely could get John Danks from the Rangers and Masset, another bullpen guy similar to Britton. Danks has far greater potential than Clippard. But he's more likely to step right in in 2008 and give the sox the 2007 version of Bmac probably will [a 4.50 ERA and 190 IP] Now if the Yanks want to trade Humberto Sanchez instead of Clippard, then that might change my thinking. But few teams will give up one of their 1-2 top prospects for a 1 yr rental. They are more likely if they can have the guy for 2 yrs, as is the case with Javy. Keeping Freddy over Javy for 2007 is probably an improvement, and would make for a stronger rotation. Esp if Freddy's velocity was down due to overwork, and if the prognosis for pitching at full strength looks good. He should be able to post a sub 4.00 era in 07. Will Javy? that's a crapshoot. The sox won't re-sign both MB and Freddy, with MB more likely. Offer arb. to Freddy, and get picks for him. Danks then could step into the 08 rotation, filling Freddy's spot. With that in mind, I'm thinking 10 yrs of Danks, 1 yr of Freddy, + 2- 1st rd draft picks in the 2008 draft >>> 2 yrs of Javy, 10 years of a Tyler Clippard type SP acquired in a Freddy trade] or / 1 yr of Javy and 10 yrs of a CLippard along with the players acquired of Javy were traded in the 07 offseason [which may not be much, depending on how his 2007 season goes] Thoughts?

Seems that Freddy to the Angels isn't happening. http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...tesox-headlines For some reason, Javy seems more likely to go with talk like this. He could get a better SP prospect like Danks, and a reliever who could help in 07. The only way the Sox might be able to get a "sure thing" SP prospect for Freddy is in a deal with the Yankees [Humberto Sanchez, if the Yanks are indeed looking to deal prospects for vets] Keeping Freddy over Javy would seem to help the sox in 07, with Freddy more likely to post a sub 4.00 ERA than Javy. The sox won't re-sign both MB and Freddy, with MB more likely. Offer arb. to Freddy, and get picks for him. Danks then could step into the 08 rotation, filling Freddy's spot. With that in mind, I'm thinking 10 yrs of Danks, 1 yr of Freddy, + 2- 1st rd draft picks >>> 2 yrs of Javy, 10 years of a Tyler Clippard type SP acquired in a Freddy trade] and whatever prospects/ players the sox could get for him if they traded him next offseason [which may not be much, depending on how his 2007 season goes] With KW's overreaction that Santana trade [which would seem to be largely in the sox favor], Freddy may not be as ready to be dealt as everyone thinks.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Nov 18, 2006 -> 11:02 AM) I read the blurb 3 times before I posted it. I want to make sure I wasn't misreading it. It didn't make a whole lot of sense from the Angels standpoint, but sometimes GM's get enormed with a guy and undervalue another. So, I put it out there as it was written. Actually, it makes more sense than at first glance. The Angels need a guy who can give them 200+ innings, with the veterans Escobar and Colon with health concerns. That will take the pressure off their young guys Weaver and Joe Saunders.

QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 11:48 PM) Its quite simple, Freddy showed a plus splitter to go with already good breaking pitches and a much better feel for pitching late in the season. Mix that in with a guy who has been a 200 inning a year guy consistently, who has won big games, pitches good against contenders (historically speaking) and can absolutely dominate teams (especially when Colon will probably still have some set backs) and it makes a lot of sense, imo. The Angels aren't looking to win 2 years from now, they want to develop some guys but Moreno learned one thing last year and thats that you can't develop too much so he may be telling Stoneman, get me a proven ace, and Santana is probably the closest to getting a raise so they've decided he could be expendable (for the right price). And if they get Anderson (defensively they need help in CF) and a guy like Josh Fields (with us getting Figgins back, who they are apparently down on) and it makes a lot of sense to me. Good points. I could see Freddy packaged with young guys like Fields and Anderson. That way, if Freddy leaves the Angels would still have two position players locked up for years. No way is it a straight up deal involving just those two If the sox could net Santana in a Freddy deal, and the Sox worked out a deal for Danks, that would give the sox a 2007 rotation of: Garland Bmac Santana Buerhle Contreras and a possible 2008 rotation of: Bmac Santana Danks and 2 of Buerhle/ Garland/ Contreras [which if Buerhle is re-signed, one of Jon or Jose could be traded in the 07 offseason]

Why the angels would get rid of Santana for freddy is beyond me. But it did say as part of a package [Josh Fields perhaps?] I'd take santana. Though with is name mentioned in a deal for Carl Crawford, moving him to TB would be hard to pass up. One thing is clear, that the sox should get a really good deal for one of their SP's.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 01:44 AM) You didn't sound so optimistic about trading Neal in your other thread, why the sudden turnaround in three days? Especially when you noted how Cotts should only be delt for an overwhelming offer, which I don't believe many would consider Aardsma and Vasquez. I said I'll give KW the benefit of the doubt. His track record of getting good players and giving up his own guys/ prospects has been very solid. He and his staff have been great evaluators of their own talent, whether its guys in the minors or majors. I think Cotts does have value. But if the sox think it's time to cut bait on Neal, who am I to judge. They have the proven track record. If Aardsma can throw more strikes than he has [a slight adjustment here or there, sure], and if Vasquez can throw for the sox in 2007 [which he should] this trade doesn't look so one sided.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 17, 2006 -> 01:11 AM) That doesn't mean the Cubs won't try. Or won't be forced to try. I'm sure the cubs will try. that's the scary part.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Nov 16, 2006 -> 11:46 PM) I think we should trade him to the Cubs, they might want to slot him into a starting pitchers slot. Maybe we can get David Aardsma and Carlos Vasquez for him? Cotts won't be a SP. Not even in the NL.

These are the type of deals KW has done very well on. Neal was horrible vs. the top lefty batters in the AL central--which is his biggest job. I for one will give KW the benefit of the doubt.

If the Drays liked a SP prospect from a team the sox dealt Freddy to, then I could see a deal for Baldelli. I'm not up on his past injuries, though. But he's got a lot of upside. And he'd cost far less than Crawford. But he's not worth BMac.

QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Nov 15, 2006 -> 12:23 PM) From today's Newsday; And Beck I would be very happy if we could get that type of package for Freddy Garcia, very happy indeed. The Yankees certainly are one of the few teams that do not value pitching prospects. Hughes yes. But I don't think the Yanks have been drooling over the Tigers and Orioles minor leaguers. A three for one deal for Freddy would be very plausible, esp with Hughes not included.

The florida writer only suggested a trade. Anderson would be worth far more than Andino.

With the Yankees adding the pitchers from their recent trades, I could see a Freddy Garcia deal. In return, something along the lines of Humberto Sanchez [Clippard is too much of flyball pitcher], Chris Britton, and a bullpen prospect [either JB Cox--AA or Kevin Whelan-high A [supposedly has wicked stuff].

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Nov 14, 2006 -> 04:14 AM) Why? Because Florida's not stupid, that's why. I didn't ask why

FWIW, Florida would be very interested in Anderson. Another Florida paper mentioned it. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/basebal...-sports-marlins

QUOTE(spiderman @ Nov 13, 2006 -> 03:59 PM) I just don't think that a team with a limited payroll is going to take on a player who struggled last season, and now is due for arbitration where he's going to get some sort of raise. A mid level salaried team will take a flier on Pods. Colorado isn't that strapped for cash. Esp when any team in the NL West can win that division.

QUOTE(Chet Lemon @ Nov 13, 2006 -> 05:25 PM) trade iguchi & dye to the yankees for cano and melky cabrera, then use the money saved from the trade to acquire a proven bullpen cornerstone and ink crede to a long term deal. The post was about what to do with Neal Cotts. Maybe you got the wrong thread QUOTE(WCSox @ Nov 13, 2006 -> 09:58 PM) In his three full seasons in the majors, Cotts has had one stellar season and two pretty bad ones. Given that, I don't see him being worth a significant amount on the trade market, even if he is a LHP. Since '05 showed us that he can pitch well, I'd rather give him another year. Given that Logan was bad last year and that Thornton has a long track record of failure, I think that the Sox need to keep their options open right now. JMO. Well said. Thornton could be a one yr wonder, and then the sox would be back to square one with no reliable LHP for the pen. Though I do want to correct a small part of your post Neal was good for the first half last yr. So he's had 1 1/2 good seasons not just one. He had a 2.95 ERA at the break last yr, which I linked in my 1st post. QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Nov 13, 2006 -> 09:30 PM) Keep him unless you can get something very nice in return. He's definitely not a guy I want to give away. Few teams will overpay for Neal with his horrible 2nd half of 06 and only 1 consistent season. Most teams will try and low ball KW. He shouldn't and probably won't bite.

QUOTE(TLAK @ Nov 13, 2006 -> 12:48 PM) Crisp would give you more power but less speed on the bases and OBP. Figgins certainly fits the role but like Roberts, his numbers are close to Pods so why change. I guess it comes down to what you project Scotty to do next season. If you see him on a down slope then make the move. If he can hover around his career norms then you can win with him while Owens develops. I don't think SB's is the key to what the sox need from a leadoff guy. It's a guy who can do different things with the bat [bunt for hits and SF; put the ball in play on the ground to get IF hits--no more Pods and his weak pop ups; hit for doubles and triples]; get on base a decent amount; and steal bases when needed. Both Figgins and Crisp get a lot of IF hits, bunt well and get a lot of XBH's.

QUOTE(TLAK @ Nov 13, 2006 -> 12:32 PM) I have a hard time buying into this board's conventional wisdom that Roberts would be an upgrade over Podsednik. Player Age G.. AB.. R.. H.. 2B. 3B HR RBI BB. SO. BA. OBP. SB. CS Podsedn 30 595 2255 354 620 111 23 25 175 219 374 .275 .342 212 65 Roberts 34 666 2204 358 594 76 42 21 181 245 278 .270 .344 207 50 Roberts is older and, coming off his best year, his career stats are pick 'em versus Pods coming off a poor year. Some of the best deals are the ones you don't make and I have a feeling this is one of them. I think they should hang on to Scott and let Ozuna, Sweeney and Owens push him for playing time. Out of the layers I named Owens is the one to watch. He has the tools to do what Scott did for the Sox last year but is too green to bank on. Should the White Sox get lucky and he matures quickly this whole thread will become irrevelent. I'm not sold on Roberts. Esp. not as he'll get a 3 yr deal at minimum from some team. But Pods isn't the answer either. A play for Crisp or Figgins should be ahead of staying pat with Pods. Owens isn't ready for 2007.

Some people are speculating that Cotts could be traded. Realistically, that isn't going to happen. Some team would have to come in with an overwhelming offer. That isn't likely. The only teams that will overpay for a LH reliever are teams with a lot of cash and are perennial playoff contenders. Neal's horrible 2nd half of 2006 will scare those teams away. Other GM's will come with ridiculous low ball offers that KW should laugh at. Not to mention who could replace Neal. LH relievers are hard to come by. Jamie Walker will be very expensive, and he could go to virtually any team in the majors. Boone Logan probably isn't ready. So for what the sox could get in return for Neal, and the cost it would take to get a replacement, a trade probably isn't worth it. And what happens if Thornton has trouble. The sox would be back to square one with Neal gone. Can Neal bounce back and come near his 2005 and 1st half of 2006? Who knows [iMO, the workload of 05, coupled with the busy 1st half of 2006 when Neal had to pick up the slack left by Cliff not being reliable contributed to Neal's 2nd half drop.] But it's more likely than the sox picking up someone new to come in and put up those same numbers. Neal's 1st half was very respectable, posting a sub .300 ERA. It's his horrible 2nd half that most of us remember. For my money, Neal should stay. And have an eRA for '07 near 3.00 like his 1st half of 06. 2005 may have been a career yr for Neal. But something close to what he did then would still be very valuable