Kenny Hates Prospects

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 01:15 PM) Was checking out the Mets payroll commitments as well. They are looking to unload Castillo, who does pretty much nothing for us and has a brutal contract. They are looking for bats though, potentially at 1b, as they plan to see if Delgado is healthy in winter ball this year. I wonder if they might be interested in some sort of Konerko for Mike Pelfrey swap. He evidently has a club option for 2010, but I can't find the figure on it. Just trying to find some salary relief here...anyone else have any ideas? Pelfrey is a stud. He had a rough year last season but this guy has the potential to be another Derek Lowe for several years. There's no way they would deal him for Paulie IMO unless we threw in a bunch. Even then I doubt they'd deal him because starting pitching is an issue for them. They gave out that garbage contract to Oliver Perez last year and I imagine a primary focus of theirs is unloading it.

QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 10:58 PM) No offense, but this is why the Donaghy book stuff pisses me off. Now, everyone's going to think every game is fixed. If the refs were going to fix a game, they would sure as hell make sure it doesn't come down to the final 0.3 seconds of the game. Why does the book piss you off? The league itself should piss you off for letting this s*** go on. That's like getting mad at Canseco instead of Selig. Last night's game was a perfect example of the same inexcusable officiating you see so often in the NBA. The fans *should* b**** about these things and call the fix, even if there is no fix. That's called public pressure, and the league needs more of it because they're clearly not policing themselves very well as it stands. The fact that the league came out last year in support of the no-call flagrant foul by Rondo on Miller instead of admitting their mistakes like men just shows how little accountability there is.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 12:20 PM) His ERA as a starter is about 5.40 with a 1.67 WHIP in 216 IP. His career numbers as a reliever: 3.66 ERA, 1.35 WHIP, 7.8 K/9, 1.94 SO/BB, .244 BAA, .694 OPSA, very good. He also posted a 3.41 ERA, 1.33 WHIP and 8.3 K/9 the 2 years prior to landing in San Francisco. He's a real good bet out of the pen. So he's better as a reliever then, but those numbers last year are still an aberration until he proves they're not by actually repeating them. If you predict Affeldt to put up those same 2009 numbers in 2010, then he's more than worth his contract even in this economy. If he keeps with his career relief line then it's still an overpayment for a reliever IMO, although not a major one.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 12:05 PM) No, I see how it works for us. I almost made the same suggestion at the very same time as you. Then I changed my mind because I figured Kal would rip me a new one for suggesting it. I just don't really see SF wanting to give up their best bullpen arm to add PK, unless the pickings get REAL thin and none of these hitters want to sign there because it's where hitters go to die. Affeldt's career numbers. He had an astounding season last year that will in all probability not be replicated. It would not be all that surprising if in his second full season, Randy Williams had a year that is in line with Affeldt's career line of 4.27 ERA, 1.45 WHIP, 9.0 H/9, 4.0 BB/9, 6.9 K/9. So the difference here might not be as stark as it currently looks when just comparing their 2009 seasons. Affeldt IMO is still a bad contract.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 11:51 AM) I saw Affeldt too, and was going to suggest that. Until I looked at Affeldt's numbers. He led the mlb in holds last year and posted a 1.73 ERA. While $4 million is a bit high for a reliever, he's been damn good. Why would they want to give us Affeldt when they could probably sign someone off the FA market for $7-8 million and keep him? The framework would just be Konerko for Affeldt, and you could work from there. For the sake of argument, let's say we send Williams over there. Is the difference between Affeldt + Ishikawa and Williams + Konerko worth an added $8M to the payroll to them? It might be, because they have major problems with their offense. If not, we could throw in a decent 'spect or two, doesn't really matter. What would be important to us more than anything would be clearing that $8M while filling one of our holes.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 11:42 AM) I didn't word that properly. I meant those contracts aren't so bad that you'd have to include one of the top 5 1B in the game to move them, you pick up some of the contract or include one of your 2nd tier prospects and someone will take a gamble on them on a 1 year deal. There's very little starting pitching available in free agency. I agree that you don't need to include Votto just to move him. I think Alonso or Bailey could do the same, and with Votto included the Reds would be looking at some nice prospects in the deal. The whole point of MLB Trade Rumors mentioning this is the idea that the Reds could turn a bad contract (let's say Arroyo) from a $6M overpayment into Arroyo + Votto, which would be about a $6M underpayment given Votto's salary vs. production. So in the second scenario the Reds wouldn't be able to get as much as they would by dealing Votto straight-up for prospects, but they'd still be able to get a couple blue-chip prospects IMO, while also shedding major cash.

I've mentioned this before a couple of times, but if we could get Gonzalez then a Konerko-for-Affeldt swap could make a ton of sense for us. We would shed $8M in such a deal, with Gonzalez taking $4.75, leaving us with $3.25M extra. That extra savings could pay for Jenks in arb, making Affeldt the first lefty out of the pen and keeping Thornton in a setup role, OR we could make Thornton the closer, Affeldt the lefty setup man, bring in a third lefty at the minimum, and then deal Jenks' $7-8M in arb for prospects, which would give us roughly another $10-11M to play with.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 11:26 AM) I get that, people missed the point but I still don't buy it. So they'd move their best young, cheap player (he's proven far more than Jay Bruce) so they can move one or more of their bad contracts? No, that's just not working for me. You shouldn't have any trouble finding a trade partner for their more expensive players, they all have their value, it wouldn't be necessary to package one of the top 5 1B in the game to get a decent return. This isn't Ryan Howard and Jim Thome it's Matt LaPorta and Prince Fielder or Jarrod Saltalamacchia and Brian McCann. I completely disagree with this. Harang's deal: 2010:$12.5M, 2011:$12.75M ($2M buyout); guaranteed $14.5M through 2010 Arroyo's deal: 2010:$11M, 2011:$11M club option ($2M buyout); guaranteed $13M through 2010 These are some bad deals in this economy. They have *zero* positive value and the Reds will have to either eat salary to move them (which they won't want to do) or include pieces to make the deal sensible for another club. The Votto part is speculation on their part, but you could also sub in Homer Bailey or Yonder Alonso as well. If these pitchers are $8-9M pitchers on the open market, then something has to be done to make up for the extra $4-6.5M they are due.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 06:06 AM) Almost as big a pipe as Adrian Gonzalez. And MLB trade rumors speculating that a stud such as Votto could be available is no different than me speculating that I could somehow bang Ice Tea's wife Coco if I were to run into her. Gonzalez is ***not*** a pipedream. He will be heavily shopped and most likely traded this winter. Whoever offers the best package of talent in the eyes of the Padres' FO will get him. The Padres have already sent out their brochures to season ticket holders, and in them there is no mention of their biggest star. Doesn't sound like a pipedream to me. OTOH, the Reds do not have to trade Votto. They can trade Alonso instead, and they can wait to do it. Unlike the Padres who are looking at a payroll of around $40M or less, the Reds are still looking to be in the $65-70M range, and Votto is still pre-arb. QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 07:28 AM) The better mark might be Brandon Phillips. He's flown under the radar a bit, but he's a very, good player. We don't have the money. If Kenny doesn't have the money to sign Hideki Matsui as a DH then he doesn't have the money to trade for Phillips either. And the Reds are moving salary, not picking it up, so a deal where we send back another contract would be unlikely.

QUOTE (Kalapse @ Nov 11, 2009 -> 11:07 AM) Dear god I hate that site. Yes the Reds need to cut costs but how does Votto enter into the equation? He doesn't, people just assume that he'll be dealt because Yonder Alonso is waiting in the wings. Joey Votto has turned into one of the best hitters in the game and has but 2 years of service under his belt, he's the face of a losing franchise, there's no incentive to trade him. If they were so inclined to deal him he'd have considerably more value than Adrian Gonzalez seeing as how he's still under team control for 4 more years. They're going to dump 1 or more of Brandon Phillips, Bronson Arroyo, Aaron Harang and Francisco Cordero seeing as how they're the ones making all the money, they do have trade value and they're not the face of the franchise. It's not their fault that others cannot comprehend what's written very well. This is the quote: So they're saying that the Reds are going to have to make a decision between Votto and Alonso, which everyone knows, and that if they choose to deal Votto, they could package him with a bad contract to also dump salary in the deal. Instead of it being Harang/Arroyo + cash for nothing, they could do Votto + Harang/Arroyo for prospects. Doesn't sound like too far fetched of an idea to me. And they are NOT saying that the Reds would trade Votto straight-up for prospects either as has been mentioned here.

bumped for the finish of tonight's Bulls game

Okay, so Steve Stone is sarcastic as hell and his wife looks like she's barely out of high school. During telecasts he says they love going to Taco Bell together after the games, you know, for the 4th Meal. His wife loves it, just can't get enough of that taco eating. Now I don't know why I just thought about this now, but I meant to make this thread a few months or something. My question is, does the Stone Pony actually like Taco Bell or is this his way of cracking jokes on air? Sometimes I think he gets off (no pun intended) on saying things that fly right over the ol' Hawkaroo's head, and when I feel like he's doing this I laugh, because it's hilarious. So share your thoughts on this please. PS I think Stoney is the s*** and I hope he sticks around for the next 10+ years, so I'm not trying to rip on him at all.

QUOTE (qwerty @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 08:50 PM) Also you would have to take in account full time player naturally regresses once they are moved to the dh. A regressing offensive konerko would regress even further. Then we have to hope dye bounced backed to more respectable numbers . Such an idea should never put into action, and thankfully it won't. We still need two bats as far as i'm concerned (i think we will be pleasantly surprised this off-season) and dye is simply no longer in the equation. Agree. I think Kenny is being soft on JD because Kenny loves JD, as he and all other Sox fans should. But that said, the book has closed on Dye as an everyday player here, and if he's ever back it will either be as a pinch hitter/backup 1B a couple years down the road or as a coach.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 10:26 PM) Well, trust me, I'm with you man. I'm as excited about the possibility as you are. But that just sounds as silly a way for someone to come about this information as I can think of... I agree it's strange, but we can't write it off until we see it posted on bleacherreport.com. That's the protocol.

QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 10:18 PM) Well that ends that speculation. No it doesn't. Maybe they hit it off well in Spring Training and have become best friends on X-Box or something. Who knows? The point is, Wally Cleaver aka Clayton Richard is trying to help us land Gonzalez, so nothing else really matters.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 10:12 PM) Now this makes it seems a bit less-likely to me. How the hell would Clayton Richard know anything? Would they ask Richard about Hudson because he played with him? Did he even play with him last year? I don't get why they would tell Richard anything...and it seems unlikely to me that the two would have spent enough time together to have forged some sort of friendship. Obviously, I don't know, but it just seems a bit strange to me... Look at the rest of the forum, and we're talking about backup catchers, Sox re-treads on reclamation deals, and committing money to Pods again so we don't have to run Jordan Danks out there everyday. If Harry from ESPN 1000 had a source that said God told Clayton Richard to build an ark and fill it with a male-female pair of every species of animal on the planet, then as long as this scenario ended up bringing us Adrian Gonzalez in some roundabout way, I'd still take the opportunity to get excited. BTW, the base info isn't odd at all. If the Sox make an offer then Hudson is in it, either headlining it or co-headlining it.

QUOTE (Markbilliards @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 09:50 PM) Can you imagine how amazing Gonzalez would be if he didn't play in Petco for half the season? 2009: Home: .244/.413/.446/.859 Road: .306/.402/.643/1.045 Career: Home: .260/.355/.441/.795 Road: .300/.370/.565/.935 This guy would eat people if he played in the Cell. And holy s***, imagine him hitting between Beckham and a healthy CQ. I'd never stop smiling.

QUOTE (GO CHI SOX! @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 09:43 PM) I got this from another board: On the way home today, Harry from ESPN 1000 claimed he had an inside source that stated Clayton Richard called Daniel Hudson today to inform him that he was a key piece in a trade the Padres & Sox were working on, so that the Sox would get Adrian Gonzalez. And I'm pissed that the Bulls got raped on that call. God I hope this is true. That call was complete bulls***. Stacey had it right when he said the call should have stood since there certainly wasn't anything close to sufficient evidence that the shot was no good. The NBA refs continue to make a mockery of themselves. And Brad Miller is the anti-AJ. He's always in the middle of the big controversial calls but he and his team never benefit.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 09:39 PM) Depending on what your scouts think of Hudson. And Flowers, too. Don't forget that before the Braves traded Flowers to us for Javy, he was a major piece in their talks for Peavy. This may sound weird coming from me, an admitted anti-sabermetric person, but the new GM in San Diego was probably up to his knees in all those stats, and Flowers and Hudson are both extremely saber-friendly players.

QUOTE (chisoxfan09 @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 08:41 PM) I have seen some posts on other boards that sacrifice our front four by adding either Floyd or Danks as the centerpiece which to me kills any offer KW makes. Like it has been mentioned you don't subtract from your strength to add a hole to fill. I think the added attendance of fielding a winner for 2010/11 can make up the difference in payroll and add budget for free agents at the end of 2010 for example. It all makes sense from a fan point of view. I agree. Floyd and Danks would be the breaking points for me, not because Gonzalez isn't worth it, but because our rotation is our bread and butter. We don't want to make lateral moves here, we want to improve the MLB team and take us from a strong Division Championship contender to a legit World Series contender, and IMO a bat like Gonzalez does that. I also would neglect to include Danks or Floyd because I can't see another team offering that caliber of player anyway. And I agree with the last part too. The Sox have shown that they'll add payroll for a real winner, so it makes sense to try to win.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 08:34 PM) Actually I'd disagree there. In 2011, you'd have to worry about who's going to play 1b, who's going to be your closer, who's going to be your first lefty out of the pen. Yeah, we'd have a hell of a lineup, but I think that it would really evaporate rapidly. The issue is not what these guys will do when they come up, the issue is that you can't build a team right now, especially holding a couple of really large contracts, if you don't have counter-balancing young guys to put in. KW's pulled off a miracle here rebuilding the minor leagues to a point where we can legitimately compete for a long time. You trade everything except D2 for Gonzalez, and you're making a run for 1 year before your window closes. Gonzalez is a 1B so he would be playing 1B. Who is going to be the closer in 2011? I don't even know who is going to be the closer in 2010. It might be Thornton, and if it is, Thornton is locked up for 2011 anyway. The first lefty is our problem this year too, and given the state of bullpens around the league, I imagine that every single season we Sox fans will head into the offseason looking for a reliever or two. Gonzalez is super cheap for the next two seasons. So is Floyd, so is Beckham, so is Alexei, so is Thornton, and hopefully CQ and Danks get locked up at a reasonable price over the offseason to give us cost certainty. It's not like we've got large contracts at every position for the next two years. I disagree wholeheartedly about Kenny rebuilding the minors so we can compete for a long time. We've gotten a TON better but this last draft was still a disappointment IMO overall because we failed to sign Jones and Morgado after dealing Richard and Poreda, and our system is not very deep throughout. Our system is top-heavy and the exciting levels in 2010 will be Kanny and Winston-Salem when you take Charlotte out of the picture. Birmingham will have a couple of guys, like Shirek, Jones and Morel, and probably D2 if he's here on a short stint before moving up, but it's mainly in the lower levels and climbing. Upchurch, Heidenreich, and Holmberg could all be back in rookie ball next season. And really, it's mainly the pitching at the lower levels anyway, because position wise we don't have a ton. There's Mitchell, Escobar, Gonzalez, Thompson, etc. but not a lot. I don't think the Sox are doing backflips over Justin Greene and Tyler Kuhn. Kenny still needs to work the trade market for proven players like he has been doing during his tenure as GM because usually he gets the better end of the deal. And as the farm goes, we still have a lot of work to do.

QUOTE (chisoxfan09 @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 08:24 PM) What about if it does not kill us what about: 1. Hudson 2. Flowers 3. Viciedo 4. Torres 5. A/AA prospect Torres could be a throw-in or something, but I doubt it. The "throw-ins" on a deal like this would probably be guys like Charlie Leesman, Nathan Jones, Miguel Gonzalez, Eduardo Escobar, Santos Rodriguez, etc. They would still be guys who have the potential to be better than average regular players or top-end relievers, not 6th starter candidates. Lucas Harrell or Clevelan Santeliz could definitely interest them IMO, because both are close to ready and both have arms.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 08:00 PM) And yet, people don't seem to consider what happens to the Sox lineup the same way. Do we not, 1 year out, wind up with that exact same "Crap" at 3 positions? 1 year out? Gonzalez would be under contract for 2011 as well. 2012 would be when you'd have to start worrying about who is going to play where, but it's kind of foolish to piss away at a chance to win it all in 2010 and 2011 because you're worried about what the 2012 team would look like. The odds are that at least a couple of these guys won't be better than average players, and we would be running them out there and letting them learn, and taking the hits in the loss column, while we tried to figure out who was going to stick and who would have to be traded. The notion that any of these players would jump into the picture immediately and set the world on fire is foolish, and that's pretty much what would have to happen - and at least a couple times over - for us to be a better team with them than with Adrian Gonzalez. Remember how great Ryan Sweeney was going to be? He had a very promising second half with Oakland last year and his power may finally be coming. But even if Sweeney's power does come next year, that would still be 4 years after he made his MLB debut with us. That's a long time to wait on someone and it's nuts to think these guys will all be ready to contribute seriously to the club even as early as 2012. And Sweeney was a much better prospect than Danks IMO and arguably a better prospect at one point than anyone we have on the farm is right now.

QUOTE (NIUSox @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 06:33 PM) Right before they went off the air today on the Afternoon Saloon, Harry said that he heard from a source close to the Sox that Hudson is the centerpiece to a possible deal for Gonzalez. FWIW The Sox need to do everything in their power to reunite Hudson and Carter. QUOTE (iamshack @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 07:37 PM) Whoa! You serious, Clark? The Padres have to trade Adrian. If you were in their shoes (looking at a $40M payroll for the foreseeable future), and the Sox made what you thought was the best offer, which would give you more hope for the future... This: C Crap 1B Gonzalez 2B Crap SS Cabrera 3B Crap LF Blanks CF Crap RF Venable/Headley; Latos-Young-Correia-Richard-??? Or this: C Flowers 1B Blanks 2B Retherford SS Cabrera 3B Viciedo LF Headley CF Danks RF Venable; Latos-Hudson-Young-Correia-Richard

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 10, 2009 -> 03:09 PM) Now that I think about it, the best argument for why someone like PK might be movable despite the salary is the one I just gave; the guys who are available in the FA market are guys who really shouldn't be playing defense everyday. PK can still do that. If I'm someone like the Mets, I probably don't give up my top guy given his contract, but I might be willing to pay extra to avoid having a gaping hole there. Problem is...we'd be left with no one to fill the hole ourselves. Our definite current holes: DH, RF, bullpen lefty Let's say for the sake of argument that we've got about $6M left to spend right now. It's a lot easier to fill 4 holes with $18M than it is to fill 3 holes with $6M. Edit: For that reason I'd gladly give Paulie away for a non-prospect assuming the acquiring team would eat all of that contract.