just throwing this out there - not sure what we'd do for another pitcher but, whattabout Garland?

DRays probably don't want to shell out ~$7 mil for one year of Jon. They need something to build on (McCarthy).

Edited December 6, 200520 yr by 3E8

Ya..well I have finals next week.  By making this site,  I credit you with the down fall of me, academically.

This week.

 

Last finals I'll ever have, btw.

I should be reading.  So far I've yet to read a page.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I have 3 papers to re-write, accounting chapters to read, and what am I doing.??

 

Read this and watching Empire Strikes Back..

 

Man my GPA is going to suffer this semester.

The only reason I don't think this is that realistic a rumor is that KW has stated he's basically done in terms of bigs moves for the offseason.  It could just be a plan so he can fly under the radar, but still.  (this might have been posted inbetween the first and 8th page.. I'm too lazy to read all of the posts speculating on who the Sox would have to give up etc.)

 

KW wouldn't go public about it one way or the other. Remember the Visquel Fiasco last year?

Edited December 6, 200520 yr by Jordan4life_2005

DRays probably don't want to shell out ~$7 mil for one year of Jon.  They need something to build on (McCarthy).

 

good call

Ya..well I have finals next week.  By making this site,  I credit you with the down fall of me, academically.

This should be better than my prior semester, I had finals going on the same time that the sox were in town for a 4 game series. Somehow i was able to go to 3 of the 4 games and increase my GPA, lol.

 

Of course this year I'm suffering major senioritis and am seriously behind in my studies. I cant wait till next Thursday when my last final is over.

God damn this thread got long quick....to the original rumor of McCarthy and/or Fields for Crawford...I highly doubt Tampa would do Fields for Crawford straight up. If I am KW, I'd offer them Fields, Tracy, and one of Timo/Marte/Willie.

I disconnected my DSL connection so I could write a quick 3 page paper for my English class. My first final is on Thursday and this god forsaken site is killing me.

In Rowand's worst season, and Crawford's best season, Rowand hit more 2B's per AB and they had identical HR per AB figures.  Both of their K:BB rates are pitiful.  Crawford will steal you a lot more bases, but he's a minimal offensive upgrade.

 

I don't know how much to value defense at this point, but if you're talking about both of them as CFers, it's pretty close. Of course, you also got wonder about what kind of peak Crawford is going to get to -- it seems like he's on the road to a 120 OPS+ or so, that seems like a reasonable peak. I believe he was close to 110 last year.

Didnt Crawford play LF last year, if that is the case who would play CF. I would guess Pods because he has played there before

Didnt Crawford play LF last year, if that is the case who would play CF.  I would guess Pods because he has played there before

Crawford is a much better defensive OFer than Pods. He would likely play CF if KW could some how magically make a trade to aqcuire him. The only thing thats negative about Crawford is a few of his comments he made last year when Pods beat him in the Final All-Star Spot Fan Voting. Remember he said "What Chicago did was bush league"

Do we really want a guy with an attitude like that on our team? I'm sure KW will take this sort of stuff into account. You have to think about team chemistry and there individual attitude of a player- not just there talent.

Crawford is a much better defensive OFer than Pods. He would likely play CF if KW could some how magically make a trade to aqcuire him. The only thing thats negative about Crawford is a few of his comments he made last year when Pods beat him in the Final All-Star Spot Fan Voting. Remember he said "What Chicago did was bush league"

Do we really want a guy with an attitude like that on our team? I'm sure KW will take this sort of stuff into account. You have to think about team chemistry and there individual attitude of a player- not just there talent.

Very true about the comments he made, right when I saw this thread, thats what I thought about. I guess his attitude would be a concern, but wasnt AJ considered a cancer? But if there is something that I have learned since Kenny has been the GM, is never doubt the guy, he knows what he is doing.

 

The options for CF seem to be Pierre, Crawford (both unlikely) Anderson, Owens, and Young. Out of these how would you rank them? Are we better off keeping our guys and using one of them in CF, or should we go get a one year rental in Pierre, who now I am hearing is going to cost Young or McCarthy, Or should we trade Fields and a minor league pitcher for Crawford?

OMG I read on ITI that the Cubs just signed Furcal to a $100M deal.

 

9 pages from this?

 

I don't buy it.

Very true about the comments he made, right when I saw this thread, thats what I thought about.  I guess his attitude would be a concern, but wasnt AJ considered a cancer?  But if there is something that I have learned since Kenny has been the GM, is never doubt the guy, he knows what he is doing.

 

The options for CF seem to be Pierre, Crawford (both unlikely) Anderson, Owens, and Young.  Out of these how would you rank them?  Are we better off keeping our guys and using one of them in CF, or should we go get a one year rental in Pierre, who now I am hearing is going to cost Young or McCarthy, Or should we trade Fields and a minor league pitcher for Crawford?

Right now I would prefer KW go out and get a CFer with experience. Pierre has a WS ring so he is a good option. Crawford has tremendous talent offensively, defensively and base running. But is giving up McCarthy and Anderson worth it? I don't think so. Would I trade Anderson, Fields and a top pitching prospect for him? YES! In a heart beat. McCarthy is an untouchable. With Garland in doubt after 2006- WE MUST keep McCarthy. If all fails and we can't aqcuire a CFer this offseason- I would go with Anderson over Young and Owens due to his major league experience (even though it wasn't much). BUT just the thought of having an OF with little experience on a defending champion team makes me worry. Doesn't it make you worry?

Right now I would prefer KW go out and get a CFer with experience. Pierre has a WS ring so he is a good option. Crawford has tremendous talent offensively, defensively and base running. But is giving up McCarthy and Anderson worth it? I don't think so. Would I trade Anderson, Fields and a top pitching prospect for him? YES! In a heart beat. McCarthy is an untouchable. With Garland in doubt after 2006- WE MUST keep McCarthy. If all fails and we can't aqcuire a CFer this offseason- I would go with Anderson over Young and Owens due to his major league experience (even though it wasn't much). BUT just the thought of having an OF with little experience on a defending champion team makes me worry. Doesn't it make you worry?

 

I agree with you on McCarthy being untouchable we NEED to keep him. I would much rather have a experenced CF for next year. But if we could get one or the other, I would want to get Crawford for the main reason that Pierre is a FA at the end of the year and will mostly walk. Also by getting Crawford, you have him locked down til 2010. By trading for one of the CF's we will need to trade one of our 3 CF's and I would rather have Crawford for 4 years then Pierre for one year like I said before

I agree with you on McCarthy being untouchable we NEED to keep him.  I would much rather have a experenced CF for next year.  But if we could get one or the other, I would want to get Crawford for the main reason that Pierre is a FA at the end of the year and will mostly walk. Also by getting Crawford, you have him locked down til 2010.  By trading for one of the CF's we will need to trade one of our 3 CF's and I would rather have Crawford for 4 years then Pierre for one year like I said before

Thats exactly the reason why I think KW would go after Pierre instead. KW would probably only want him for one season. Then after a full season on our bench as our 4th OFer. He should be ready to be our everyday CFer in 2007. Not to mention Pierre's trade value will be a lot lesser than Crawford because of his contract status. And according to ESPN the White Sox, Cubs and Rangers are the 3 teams most active in pursuit of Pierre. Lets see what happens.....

Crawford will definitely give us the 1-2 speed in the lineup but I would not give up BMAC to get him. Pierre is a CF but I dont like him to be our CF bcoz he doesnt have a strong throwing arm. If we can get Crawford without giving up BMAC then do it.

Getting Crawford would bring ultimate completion to this offseason (minus losing Frank of course). I can't express how much I'd love to see him on the Sox. I'd give up anyone on the farm except McCarthy and maybe Young. Just to throw out a few ideas on how to get another top pitching prospect: Marlins need an OF or two just to field a team next year. They just loaded up on more pitching prospects than they have need for, maybe they'd want one of Anderson/Owens/Sweeney and Willie (they don't have a mlb ready 2b)? That's if we didn't want Pierre... man, I can't put together a cohesive argument right now, I just want Crawford muchmoreso than Pierre. It's a longshot for sure, but my interest is peaked.

Why would the drays sign Rocco to a long term deal and then trade him?

 

Cost certianty can make a player a lot more attractive on the trade market. Knowing that you have 6 years of a Baldelli you would be willing to give up more than for 3 years and a question mark. It also means that you know with certianty how much money that position will cost you for the rest of that contract and gives you the flexibilty to work with the other positions.

The main thing on this is the Garland situation. The Trib sounded like there are still negotiations. If he is locked up long term I could see McCarthy being moved. I would want more than Crawford though, that is for sure.

 

If Garland is not going to sign long term I think he could be moved especially in a three way deal.

 

Another issue is that it sounded like the Sox have thought of using a 6 man rotation due to the WBC.

I am all for getting Carl Crawford, but not if McCArthy is involved. I think he could be our best pitcher next year.

I am all for trading Fields. i was never sold on him since the day he was drafted. He has potential talent and may compaired his bat to that of Venturas, but his fielding is SUSPECT at best. Before he becomes a regular Major Leaguer, he'll be shifted to 1st or the Outfield. He will never be a major league third baseman.

Im actually kind of agree with you there. His fielding is seriously starting to look a little suspect for his experience level. Hitting hitting is only ok to me. I wouldnt be opposed to dealing him.

I love Fathom, one the best posters here IMO. He knows that, and thats why I can give him crap about it.

 

He also might be right. We all could be WAY off in the demands for Crawford. Remember what they wanted for Huff at the deadline.....

Different GM now.

just throwing this out there - not sure what we'd do for another pitcher but, whattabout Garland?

Trade Garland for Crawford, then pick up Vazquez

Vazquez is a head case. No thank you. Keep Garland for '06. TB would want a few players that are garunteed for 3 to 4 years down the road.