Jump to content

Crede and Garland to Texas?


GasHeGone
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm not too hot about this idea. Garland and Crede for Blalock and a "top" pitcher who, if called up midseason for an injury replacement, will get shelled just doesn't seem quite worth it. If we were getting 2003 version of Blalock, then yes this would be a great deal... but there are no assurances of this. Granted there are no assurances Garland doesn't revert, but I'd bet on Garland continuing to improve before Blalock. What happened to the inclusion of Wilkerson? I don't really care for the guy, but at least it was something. I think KW should squeeze one of Benoit, Kinsler, or Arias out of this supposed deal. They have 2 top SS prospects, so unless they're gonna move Young somewhere, they don't need both. Benoit had a great year out of the pen. I don't think he'd be included unless the top SP gets removed from the trade, but he should still be pushed for especially if the Rangers fail to sign any of the remaining FA SPs. At this point, both the Tejada trade and the floated Dodgers trade are more appealing to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 626
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm not too hot about this idea.  Garland and Crede for Blalock and a "top" pitcher who, if called up midseason for an injury replacement, will get shelled just doesn't seem quite worth it.  If we were getting 2003 version of Blalock, then yes this would be a great deal... but there are no assurances of this.  Granted there are no assurances Garland doesn't revert, but I'd bet on Garland continuing to improve before Blalock.  What happened to the inclusion of Wilkerson?  I don't really care for the guy, but at least it was something.  I think KW should squeeze one of Benoit, Kinsler, or Arias out of this supposed deal.  They have 2 top SS prospects, so unless they're gonna move Young somewhere, they don't need both.  Benoit had a great year out of the pen.  I don't think he'd be included unless the top SP gets removed from the trade, but he should still be pushed for especially if the Rangers fail to sign any of the remaining FA SPs.  At this point, both the Tejada trade and the floated Dodgers trade are more appealing to me.

Wilkerson will be a free agent after 2006 and is a Boras client. There would be no reason to ask for him over pitching prospects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Living here in Dallas/Ft. Worth I can tell you that Blalock is INCREDIBLY streaky. His slumps and hot-streaks can last up to 2 months sometimes. The glove is solid but it aint Crede. His contract is friendly, but I would want one of their prosepcts they refer to as "DVD" - Diamond, Volquez, or Danks. Preferrably Volquez, he looks the most ready for the bigs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Fort Worth Star Telegram:

 

The Chicago White Sox, having acquired Javier Vazquez, have extra pitching to trade and the Rangers have already placed the call, knowing they have extra outfielders.

The White Sox are willing to talk about Jon Garland, who can become a free agent after next season, but right now they want too much in return.

 

So they have been talking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Living here in Dallas/Ft. Worth I can tell you that Blalock is INCREDIBLY streaky.  His slumps and hot-streaks can last up to 2 months sometimes.  The glove is solid but it aint Crede. His contract is friendly, but I would want one of their prosepcts they refer to as "DVD" - Diamond, Volquez, or Danks.  Preferrably Volquez, he looks the most ready for the bigs.

He sounds like Crede. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Fort Worth Star Telegram:

So they have been talking.

Interesting. Here's the link for those who want to read the article:

 

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/sports/baseball/13421777.htm

 

"Knowing they have extra outfielders"? It sounds like the Rangers would want to offer us Wilkerson for Garland. Too bad we don't need or want an outfielder, especially not a Boras client on a 1-year contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 12:49 AM)
If Texas isn't willing to include one of their top prospects--pitching or not, they can remain in their perpetual pitching rut. f*** them. I'm not giving up Garland unless a top tier prospect is returned. Blalock's addition in the trade doesn't bother me, since Uribe could always play 3B if no options were found to replace Crede. It's the value of Garland, and what teams such as Texas are offering, which concerns me.

 

No way in hell should Jon Garland only give us a lower level prospect, one year rental or not. I'll repeat this--if Garcia cost us Reed(our top prospect)/Morse/Olivo, MIDSEASON, during a contract year, it's not too unreasonable to ask for one of Texas.' I can't believe Texas would trade for Garland and only use him for one year, considering the crap they have.

 

Or ask yourself this-- If Williams were trading Blalock/prospect for Garland/Crede, who here wouldn't bet the prospect in question would be one of our best? He'd give up the top prospect and we'd tell ourselves, "have to give up something to get something." "Prospects are just that--prospects." "We HAD to overpay so other teams couldn't get him."

 

 

Personally I don't think reed is that good or olivio. Only people on this board or baseball america thinks they were good. olivio is really a back up catcher and reed will be a 10hr, 280 hitter. Very light hitter, not a perenial 300 hitter.

 

You get what you get. Garcia helped us to the world series, it was worth it. He was considered a stud despite what anyone might think. Garland has NOT proved to be a stud. He had one good year, otherwise the guy was up and down. Eitherway the guy won't be here and you will need to live with what we get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 08:29 AM)
Interesting.  Here's the link for those who want to read the article:

 

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/sports/baseball/13421777.htm

 

"Knowing they have extra outfielders"?  It sounds like the Rangers would want to offer us Wilkerson for Garland.  Too bad we don't need or want an outfielder, especially not a Boras client on a 1-year contract.

 

 

I will take mench, and move pods over. Done

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will take mench, and move pods over. Done

Mench is basically a younger Carl Everett. He only hits lefties; he sucks against right-handers. He's the last thing we need. Just because he always kills us doesn't mean he's good. We can do far better than Garland for Mench.

Edited by SSH2005
Link to comment
Share on other sites

tell you truth sounds like their speculating on what we want. I take it whitesox want 3b or maybe some bullpen help, or some high prospects. I dont see why kenny go after outfield help when our system has it and anderson has job.

It would have to be Blalock and prospects because Texas doesn't have a bullpen. :D

 

Brian Anderson

Jerry Owens

Ryan Sweeney

 

We won't be trading Garland for an outfielder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The dodgers have alos made a call to whitesox

Here's a link:

 

http://www.latimes.com/sports/baseball/mlb...orts-mlb-dodger

Colletti has contacted teams with a surplus of starting pitchers, including the Chicago White Sox (Jon Garland, Jose Contreras), Boston (Wells), Yankees (Carl Pavano) and New York Mets (Kris Benson).

 

Garland, Contreras and Wells will become free agents after the season and Pavano sat out the second half last season because of a sore pitching shoulder.

The Dodgers would definately have the pitching prospects that KW would be interested in (Chad Billingsley, Jonathan Broxton, Scott Elbert).

Edited by SSH2005
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 08:29 AM)
Interesting.  Here's the link for those who want to read the article:

 

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/sports/baseball/13421777.htm

 

"Knowing they have extra outfielders"?  It sounds like the Rangers would want to offer us Wilkerson for Garland.  Too bad we don't need or want an outfielder, especially not a Boras client on a 1-year contract.

 

But he'll be playing for a contract and happens to be a Boras, which means he'll have his best season ever. In the end, he'll never put up numbers as good unless he goes into FA again. It seems like that's the way things go with Boras clients. I guess the same could be said of Crede, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think that the Angels would be the best trading partner for Garland.  SoCal, they need an innings eater, they have the money to sign him long term, and prospects to give up.

But wouldn't the Angels be better off waiting a year and just signing him? That's the question. Being a west coast team, they would have the inside track on signing Garland if he really wanted to move closer to home.

 

I sure wouldn't mind a trade of Garland for Scot Shields and prospects though.

Edited by SSH2005
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure that the Sox would like to have Blalock and Texas wants Garland. The Sox would make Texas take Crede but then we need atleast one of their top pitching prospects maybe 2.

 

But, Texas needs to sign Garland long term before this deal can happen because they're not giving all of this up knowing that Garland can walk at the end of the season AND Crede's agent is BOREASS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 09:18 AM)
But wouldn't the Angels be better off waiting a year and just signing him?  That's the question.  Being a west coast team, they would have the inside track on signing Garland if he really wanted to move closer to home.

 

I sure wouldn't mind a trade of Garland for Scot Shields and prospects though.

 

If the Angels truly want Garland, it's better for them to do it now. If other teams are also asking for Garland's service, and if they do a trade with the White Sox, they might lock up Garland immediately after the trade! For example, the Dodgers.

 

That's the risk the Angels have to take should they want to wait 'till next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would take Scot Shields- he is a beast out of the bulpen. Hmmm how about him and Jeff DeVanon? He can compete with BA for the starting CF job.

 

Like Davanon, but they can sign him for zero now. He was released by the Angels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...