caulfield12

It's going to take a LOT to get Garza. While they value Kazmir and Price more, Kazmir might be a little more expendable, due to his increasing contract numbers. OTOH, he's a lefty with nasty stuff. But Garza is cheaper and has ALMOST the same stuff...he can be equally nasty, and he's still just learning how to pitch at the big league level instead of just "throwing" like when he came up with the Twinkies. It would have to be Dye and Poreda for Garza or Dye/Jenks for Garza and something really nice (not Crawford, of course...but a player KW has targeted...he knows who it is better than we do).

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Nov 12, 2008 -> 02:52 PM) errrrrr I love me some Danks but lets not crazy. Danks and Liriano have the same fastball now, 91-93, touching 94 MPH. Liriano's slider is down from 87-90 into the low 80's. He's afraid to really let it go...that "muscle memory" of the injury seems to be affecting him mentally. Liriano mowed down the lower-tier teams (he had a lot of favorable match-ups) but he lost a couple of really big games down the stretch...I think his reputation from 2006 helped him to a large extent, but the jury's out if he will ever have that devastating slider back again (and if he uncorks it, how long his elbow will hold together). Would you trade Danks for Liriano TODAY, straight up? I wouldn't, because Danks has a nice, repeatable/easy delivery and doesn't look like nearly the injury risk that The Franchise does going forward.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 12, 2008 -> 02:46 AM) Disagree with this as well. Fields wouldn't have even been available after '07 for Beltre. Fields was shopped for Miguel Cabrera. Huge difference in ability there. If the Sox sign Viciedo there is a chance Fields could be made available. There could very well be teams out there who salivated over Fields in '07 but found out he was unavailable for anything less than a superstar. Now that the cost is lower and he may be available, the chances of a deal actually increase, not decrease. I also don't buy the idea that Fields' injuries in '07 have weakened his status as a prospect so much that Poreda would have to be included in order to get a solid but unspectacular player in his walk year. Teams are thorough in the way they do business. If a team has scouts they respect that really like Fields and the GM agrees, then they do their research, talk to the player, have him take a physical, and then they get it done. That is not to say there are a ton of teams around that love Josh Fields, but I do think there are some teams that would love to have him and that would be willing to give up some pretty good talent to get him. 23 Major League home runs in 2/3 of a season is nothing to scoff at, even if it was a year ago. Also, Broadway, McCulloch, and Egbert have no business being mentioned anywhere near Fields. Broadway and McCulloch are trash our old regime dragged in and Egbert is a 4th/5th starter prospect. Neither have the type of physical talent that makes people think "future All-Star." I meant a trade of Josh Fields (version 2007) for Beltre 2008. But that's kind of pointless...it's NOT the situation, as you noted. I'm not sure the chances of a Fields trade necessarily increase though, because KW is less likely to give him up at diminished value (look at how he's held onto Anderson) and there are fewer teams desperate to make him their Opening Day 3B, making the talent packages we would be getting in return less attractive. There's two ways of looking at it. I'm not feeling great about Viciedo either...I think it's 50/50 at best, maybe even less, that he signs with the Sox.

Oops...meant Delmon. Brothers...that one gets me all the time. Well, let's use logic. The Twins would rather hold onto D. Young than Cuddyer, who's much more expensive. Young hasn't reached or come close to his ceiling, Cuddyer has. They already have Span, Gomez and Kubel...along with Young/Cuddyer...to play 3 positions and DH. So one is the odd man out. It really could be either Kubel/Cuddyer (Kubel would be worth a little more, because he's younger/cheaper) and Cuddyer is coming off a pretty serious injury. So Cuddyer and Perkins/Blackburn SHOULD get you Beltre. But do the M's bite on that deal? I don't think the M's give up Putz AND Beltre for that package. Although I guess stranger things have happened.

Maybe Fields, Allen/Shelby and Broadway/Russell...that could theoretically get it done. Still, I would rather have Dmitri Young and Perkins/Blackburn if I were the Mariners...not even close. You get a possible All-Star and a cheap/affordable starting pitcher. With our package, you get a potenial flameout in Fields, a marginal prospect that may or may not have a position and a big ??? that will have negligible impact on the pitching staff. Still, teams like the whole 3 for 1 idea...like those dumb Cub fans who come up with five random suspect names and think that equals Rafael Palmeiro. Perhaps they were amazed by BA's homers off King Felix and are enamored with acquiring him too.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Nov 11, 2008 -> 08:58 PM) And yet he's still going to hit for big time power (even more than he is now if he joins the Sox), enough contact, play everyday, be a positive influence in the clubhouse, play astounding defense at 3B, add to the team speed and net us two 1st round picks at season's end. Then there's the wild card of him going off and becoming the best player in the game again in the second contract year of his career, incredibly unlikely (.01% chance) but you never know, that ability is hiding inside him somewhere. Believe it our not you're not going to find 9 players who hit for good contact, walk 100 times, don't strikeout, hit for good power, play great defense, run the bases well and do it all for a league minimum contract. You find imperfect but very good baseball players that mesh well and play well as a team, Adrian Beltre is a perfect fit. I don't want stolen bases...just going from first to third on singles, 2nd to home on everything but line drives...1st to home on doubles. All of these things would be nice to see.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Nov 11, 2008 -> 08:51 PM) His OBP is just frightening though. He had only 30 more walks than Juan Uribe in 200 more AB's. The thing is, we have plenty of guys like Thome, Quentin, Dye and Konerko (when healthy) with great OBP's. Even Swisher, theoretically. Beltre has been a clutch run producer with very little protection in that line-up (Richie Sexson?). The solid D is extremely important to KW...that's the main strike against Fields (along with contact at the plate) and the reason we saw Uribe (also Josh's health) down the stretch. There has to be a feeling of uncertainty about Ramirez at SS, so shoring up 3B after seeing the likes of Ventura and Crede for so long only makes sense.

The name Victorino is just cool...fits in with Chicago or Philly perfectly. Almost as cool as Lance Broadway, if he were a stud prospect coming up with the Yankees or Mets.

Yep, if you polled the clubhouse, it would be about 21-4 in favor of jettisoning Ichiro and keeping Beltre and/or Ibanez.

If you were the Mariners, who would YOU take, lol? Dmitri Young/Michael Cuddyer and Perkins/Blackburn for Beltre.... OR Drum roll please! Josh Fields and Lance Broadway/Russell/McCulloch? I don't think there's any question our neighbors to the north will be able to offer a more alluring package, if that's the route they go in. Dealing one of their starters is a huge risk though, because then they're in the Livan Hernandez/journeyman FA fifth starter's trap again. There's a 50/50 chance that the Twins will line up with Beltre and Orlando Cabrera as the left side of their IF (or Blake).

QUOTE (Cubano @ Nov 11, 2008 -> 01:35 PM) I heard or read than one before. President Carter and presidente Clinton tried to have normal relations but the cuban taliban always find a way to do something to prevent a good relationship. He dos not want a good relation because he coulod not blame anybody for his own crap. Now, he blames USA for everything. Actualy, this is a norm around the world. I said: Let the world kill each other and when somebody cry for help or do something USA do nothing. If USA does something we are bad. If USA does nothing, USA is bad. Hell with Europe, Middle East, Latin America, Asia and anybody inside or outside The Milky Way. Drill, Baby, Drill! Watch out for inflation down the road. We do not drill and at the same time we are pumping billions $$$$$$$ into the system. Obama 4 and out! I know I may catch hell from some of you Chicagoans and Sox fans, but that is OK. Must be a sense of disappointment in the Cuban community about the election...for many years, the conservative/Catholic Cuban vote helped secure the state for Republicans, at least in recent elections. Now the state has become a richer mixture of Hispanic cultures, and they voted in Obama in most states by 2 to 1 margins, eschewing their church's position (I say this as a Catholic, lol) and favoring the economic over the social/moral (fwiw, peace and social justice issues are perceived as more important to Democrats, it's just that the abortion issue is always paramount...but not in this election year). Even if they started drilling all over ANWR, it would take many months if not years to see results. That's just a stopgap solution to a long-term, endemic problem that needs to be addressed going forward. I think you will see any bailouts of the auto industry with lots of "green initiatives" imposed in terms of developing alternative energy/hybrid/battery-solar powered cars again. It's not WHETHER we do something, although even President Clinton admitted that abandoning Rwandans was his biggest mistake...it's HOW we go about doing it. We can be strong/forceful without doing it in a unilateral/militaristic fashion, and we can seek international cooperation and financial assistance without having our troops under UN Command. Friedman in the NY Times had a very good article about how all the countries in the world that were "free riders" under Bush (Japan, China, Germany, France, Russia, etc.) had to make a commitment to work with the US in the future, to share some of the costs and burdens... http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/09/opinion/...amp;oref=slogin Just interested in your take on that, Cubano. Don't want to get into a discussion better reserved for another page...but, in the new spirit of bi-partisanship, I'm hoping we can have a peaceful/thoughtful exchange of ideas, lol.

Not to mention that Safeco is one of the most pitcher-friendly parks in the game...that plays feels big when you go to a game there, like Old Comiskey did.

If Fields was coming off the 2007 season and NOT this off-season with the injury/defense/pouting issues...then you would probably have a deal. Same with pitchers like Broadway, McCullogh or Egbert a season or two ago. He hasn't sunk to Borchard/Rauch lows yet...2008 will be a huge year for Josh. We'll see how serious he was about getting in shape/rehabilitation as well as how his defense looks when/if he's healthy in the spring. I think KW will be smart enough to hold onto him at least through the middle of March and showcase him out in Arizona.

Well, Thornton is a more appropriate comparison, for sure. That said, according to Cooper, they completely redesigned not only his delivery, but added critical secondary pitches to his arsenal. Of course, before the trade, they liked his moxie/presence and his overall package or they wouldn't have made the move. They obviously saw issues with McCarthy's getting the ball up too much in USCF, his delivery, his very straight fastball...McCarthy, something about him just never looked smooth or quite right, maybe it's because he came almost directly over the top and that's fairly rare these days and even looks a bit strange. I do remember after the trade and watching his first ST outing on WGN, thinking he's throwing NOT much harder than Buehrle. But he's really matured and his fastball has that extra life or kick that tormented/fooled hitters all season long. You look at his size, you don't expect 92-93-94 MPH. You expect a soft-tosser. Arguably, Danks has better stuff than Liriano right now...as incredible as it may seem. And so does Gavin.

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Nov 11, 2008 -> 08:10 PM) how about this: 1) Sign Viciedo 2) Trade Fields for Adrian Beltre You get Adrian Beltre in a contract year (.334 / .388 / .629) during the tranistion then when he walks next year we get plenty of picks and open a spot up for Viciedo. Things that make this much sense rarely happen, but that would be awesome. Because they would ask for more than Fields...probably Fields AND Poreda, in order for this deal to go down. Kenny would counter with Fields AND Broadway/Richard, but they wouldn't bite in all likelihood. The memories are still too fresh about Borchard/Thornton and Morse/Reed/Olivo for Garcia. We've absolutely hosed them the last two trades. I think they will be much more hesitant a third time around....they're not super-desperate to trade him, he's well liked by the organization and his teammates.

I'm not sure if it's a good thing that Alexei is lifting weights...maybe it's part of his normal routine. I just think with players like Ramirez and Soriano, they get so much of their power from their wrists, forehands and the bat speed/whip. I just hope it doesn't affect his swing...not worried about him becoming the next Gabe Kapler or Juan Gonzalez though. Roberto Clemente gained his strength when he was growing up by squeezing racquetballs over and over again with his hands.

But they also had that core of Liriano (sort of), Nathan, Cuddyer, Morneau and Joe Mauer returning...that's a pretty good place to start from. Although, to their credit, they lose Hunter too, who many perceived as their unofficial team leader/spokesman/captain.

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune....ez-welcome.html Kind of short...seems like he definitely is on the side of bringing Viciedo into the fold, or he's just talking a good game about a former Cuban. Hopefully KW seals the deal (with our lack of a sure candidate in Josh Fields blocking the way, it should be more tempting) and he signs with us soon.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Nov 11, 2008 -> 04:13 PM) OM god. Affeldt is one of the worst pitchers in all of baseball. As bad as Boone. Good try with that list though. I had to laugh at the first comment. About these all being dud players. Pretty much right. When you look at pure talent and stuff, Affeldt was Matt Thornton before Matt Thornton WAS Matt Thornton, lol. It gets tiring theorizing EVERY pitcher we have come over here can be fixed, but I'm sure they have lots of insight from Cooper on pitchers who have mechanical/delivery issues (like with Danks in late 07 and then changing things coming into this year, which has also led to a 2-3 MPH increase in velocity), which pitchers look interesting but like projects (think of Aardsma, Sisco, MacDougal here) and which pitchers are completely beyond his redemption. When I was living in KC and I first saw him pitch...well, he had a VERY lively arm. The only one who came close who mysteriously disappeared from the scene was Dan Reichert, and now Zach Greinke.

You can't fault KW for many of his decisions over the last two seasons or so. Keeping Dye and Buehrle. Some mistakes (in hindsight) could be signing Contreras to such a long-term deal, and Konerko, but, at the time those deals were made, a large majority were for Paulie and we all thought Jose should be "rewarded," maybe not with that 2009 year though... Other than that, the only arguable trade (still going on) is Vazquez/Chris B. Young. Of course, if Danks disappears like Cliff Lee did for a season or two and McCarthy wins the Cy Young (odds on that happening, about as high as Sarah Palin being named Secretary of Interior or Energy by the new administration), we'll have some more recriminations. Other than Carter/Cunningham and Frank Francisco, I can't think of any prospects we've lost that I would simply LOVE to have back and miss.

They wouldn't. Unless they got another piece in return...and no, not D. Wise or Brian Anderson to replace Burrell. It would have to be something like Swisher and Dye for Victorino and an upper-tier/major league ready prospect.

All depends on KW feeling that Poreda's peak value is now and that he will never add a secondary pitch...and that there are many teams and scouts still viewing him as a front-line starter (like a 3) and not a lefty set-up guy. That's a lot of suppositions. The thing is Poreda is young/cheap/high potential. That's the best type of player (especially LH pitcher) to have in your depth chart. So in order for us to give that potential up for "veteran certainty" (higher quality than Swisher obviously), then you better get a game-changing type of player for your line-up like a Brian Roberts or Carl Crawford-ish level of player that the Sox can afford to add to the payroll...yet in his late 20's (prime) and not the downside of his career. At least Swisher, at his age, that was the right idea for turning the roster over a little bit in the direction of younger players.

QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 11, 2008 -> 09:42 AM) As usual you make some good points. One thing that I would about the Sox and Kenny's current situation is that IMO he can afford to deal both Javy and Jenks in a market starved for good, reasonably-priced pitching as well as two sluggers in a market starved for good, reasonably-priced hitting. The wrong move here IMO is trading just one player and expecting it all to work out just fine. Notice how after '06 Kenny dealt 2 SP for 5 pitching prospects. Danks and Floyd worked out, Gio and Masset were used in other deals, and Rasner is slowly but surely developing in the minors, although he's going to need to hurry up and develop if he wants to stay out of the Rule-5 draft. So in that deal we've gotten value out of 4 of the 5 players acquired so far with two of them mainstays. The right move, to me, is trading at least three, preferrably 4, of those tradeable commodities. All we need to think about right now is Danks and Floyd. If Jenks, Vazquez, Dye/Thome/Konerko/Swisher were on another team, would anyone seriously consider giving up one of Danks of Floyd for that kind of player? If we can make 4 deals, and come away with 8-12 prospects, then we only need three of those to join the big league club at some point. If we concentrate on pitching and can come away with a couple #2/#3 starters and either an everyday position player or a dominant reliever, we've already IMO added value to the organization. Kenny does trade his prospects, so also consider that some of what we would acquire in such a scenario would end up landing us other veterans, preferrably younger ones who better fit into the equation. Prospects are the easiest things to deal in this game because you can trade prospects with 25 teams (omitting divisional rivals) instead of only 5-6 depending on need, league, salary requirements, contract length, payroll, and ownership issues. Above all, this team needs to completely revamp its minor league organization as well as continue towards a new, younger core. We can't contend for the next 10 years without doing that. People always get worked up about trading for prospects, but I think it is important to understand 1) the conditions of the starting pitching market right now where the difference between a veteran who provides 200IP with a 4.50 ERA and a prospect who provides 170-180IP with a 4.80 ERA can be as much as $15 million per season, 2) that the age of our old core forces transition, 3) the impact our new core has had on our team, and 4) the importance of the Sox baseball version of the 2010 plan. We don't need to pay Javy to be a #4 when we can target a couple young #2/#3's who have a downside of a #4 at $22M less over the next two seasons; we absolutely have to get younger with our sluggers and doing it now for value instead of letting them walk could benefit tremendously; we can afford to lose dynamite in the lineup due to the emergence of Quentin and Ramirez; and finally, why not potentially add a few more pieces to the 2010 crop of talent that, if we hang on to it, could include Beckham, Danks, Poreda, Shelby, and Allen? Every one of those players, if they stay healthy, should end '09 in Double A or Triple A. Not much new to add. I guess KW has to be thinking, which one of the five younger players is most likely to regress....Quentin, Danks, Floyd, Ramirez and Jenks? I would include Thornton and Buehrle with these first five...those are our 7 most valuable properties. Then you have Konerko/Dye/Swisher. The arguments back and forth about Jenks have been interesting, to say the least. I almost might put Thornton on the market if I'm convinced I can get a similar performance out of Poreda, and trading Thornton coming off a strong season when he looked like one of the best lefty relievers in the game. The question is how much can we get for Jenks, and how confident is KW in 1) finding a replacement via trade or FA for Jenks (ala Juan Cruz or Jeremy Affeldt types) and 2) how confident he is that Dotel/Poreda/Linebrink/Russell could get the job done without Jenks at the back of the pen? Still, when it comes down to, it doesn't seem NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE to get Vazquez's .500 record and 30+ starts out of a pool of 3-5 pitching prospects who would be competing for 1-2 spots in the rotation (in addition to Richard, this scenario is with Poreda replacing Thornton)...then you have the wild card of a Contreras comeback, the possibility he could even be tried as a closer. Or bringing back El Duque, lol. Just kidding...well, sort of. Or Denys (not Baez) Reyes. Then you also have around $23-25 million or whatever with Vazquez's deal off the books to invest in places of need like 3B (Blake, Kouzmanoff, Atkins, etc.), 2B and CF. Maybe they do get Taveras and somehow pull off the deal for Roberts OR sign Orlando Hudson by saving money/prospects by picking up Taveras for a Broadway type of prospect. Then you can devote the prospects you get back for Vazquez, Jenks/Thornton and Swisher/Konerko/Dye to what you are proposing...rebuilding that foundation and depth of quality pitching that we've lost since 2005. I can't imagine what would have happened had we tried to hold onto Garcia, McCarthy and Garland...KW seems to have the right feel for who to deal and when and is on something of a roll, almost impossible for it to continue with everything breaking right with the Big 4 (CQ, Alexei, Floyd, Danks).

Do we really want any part of Street as a replacement for Jenks, or would it just be increasing the pool of talent (by committee) to go along with Dotel, Thornton, Poreda and Linebrink? On paper, those five make for a pretty imposing pen...maybe the greatest in baseball history, lol.

QUOTE (easyw @ Nov 11, 2008 -> 07:35 AM) Trading Jenks is a great idea... for all the reasons that have already been mentioned. I'd love to see another World Series for the Sox in 2010 or 2011, and that ain't gonna happen with the likes of Jenks and Dye on the roster... SELL HIGH! Not sure I understand this line of reasoning. Weren't Jenks and Dye two of the biggest reasons we succeeded in 05 and 08? I mean...it's great if you can get guaranteed major league ready players/prospects for your veterans, but we've been on the wrong and right side (Todd Ritchie and Freddy Garcia) of such deals when 2-3 players either flame out or you end up cutting into your depth and the one player you acquire is either injured or non-productive (like Nick Swisher). We're usually in a veteran dumping mode in seasons like White Flag, 2001/2002/2004/2007...it is very rarely that we have traded star players in their prime under KW. Carlos Lee is one of the few examples...we know all about that deal and the various arguments/rationales behind it. Usually, we've let players go via free agency or made "small" moves for negligible payoffs at mid-season.