Dam8610 Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 QUOTE(SEALgep @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 10:54 PM) Boston has Lowell for two seasons. Correct me if I'm worng, but isn't he moving to 1B? If so, trading Marte would open a hole at one of the corner infield positions for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 QUOTE(Dam8610 @ Dec 24, 2005 -> 07:36 PM) Correct me if I'm worng, but isn't he moving to 1B? If so, trading Marte would open a hole at one of the corner infield positions for them. They've got Kevin Youklis to play at one of the corner IF spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Dec 24, 2005 -> 03:50 AM) I think the Sox can definitely do better then a reliever and a mid - tier prospect. Remember the Mark Mulder deal was Mulder for Kiko Calero (there's your reliver), Danny Haren (now a good young starter) and Daric Barton (definite top 20 prospect in baseball). Now I don't know if the Sox would be able to get something like this because of Garland's contract. But the market for starting pitching hasn't gone done at all, the Paul Byrd's and Scott Elarton's are still getting very nice contract. Of course we had the best team last season. But I'd like to see you show any team at all last season that had better starting pitching then us at all in 2005. That's what won us the World Series. By the same token, the sox are looking for pitching that can help this yr or very soon [esp. a lefty]. With major league salaries for pitching sky high, top minor league pitching talent is also very valuable. Teams may not want to deal their top talent that can help this yr or next as they could provide salary relief for the big legue club. That is something all MLB teams want--good, young, cheap arms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 QUOTE(quickman @ Dec 23, 2005 -> 08:15 PM) I really believe many of you will be extremely dissapointed with what we get for garland. Quite frankly I truly believe many of you are over rating his trade value. We will see what comes out of it. He's a lot better than Eaton - and Eaton brought in some decent talent. I have yet to see a trade proposal that nets the Sox what the Padres got for Eaton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 QUOTE(GreenSox @ Dec 24, 2005 -> 03:53 PM) He's a lot better than Eaton - and Eaton brought in some decent talent. I have yet to see a trade proposal that nets the Sox what the Padres got for Eaton. Well said. Also, there are rumors of the Dodgers trading some of the same prospects we've talked about for David Wells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam G Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 QUOTE(GreenSox @ Dec 24, 2005 -> 09:53 AM) He's a lot better than Eaton - and Eaton brought in some decent talent. I have yet to see a trade proposal that nets the Sox what the Padres got for Eaton. Was Eaton in the same contract situation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 QUOTE(Adam G @ Dec 24, 2005 -> 04:34 PM) Was Eaton in the same contract situation? i'm fairly confident that eaton is also a free agent post this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkokieSox Posted December 24, 2005 Share Posted December 24, 2005 QUOTE(Dam8610 @ Dec 24, 2005 -> 08:36 AM) Correct me if I'm worng, but isn't he moving to 1B? If so, trading Marte would open a hole at one of the corner infield positions for them. I believe the plan is to give Youkilis the opportunity to play first this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted December 25, 2005 Share Posted December 25, 2005 QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 24, 2005 -> 10:19 AM) Well said. Also, there are rumors of the Dodgers trading some of the same prospects we've talked about for David Wells. The Dodgers aren't giving up any of their top prospects for David Wells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted December 25, 2005 Share Posted December 25, 2005 QUOTE(Jordan4life_2005 @ Dec 25, 2005 -> 12:32 PM) The Dodgers aren't giving up any of their top prospects for David Wells. Well it kind of shows the mind that Ned Colletti is in right now. He's got 4 starters locked up and with these rumors he's shown that he doesn't want Edwin Jackson starting in the rotation for 2006. But they don't want to give up their top - notch prospects for a SP like Jon Garland even though he'd be a HUGE upgrade, because he's not signed long - term. If they can trade for Wells without giving up some up their premium talent, Colletti would probably jump at it. But really, why don't they just sign Jeff Weaver and keep their prospects? I'd imagine a team like the Nats are going to get Weaver though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 25, 2005 Share Posted December 25, 2005 QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Dec 25, 2005 -> 11:13 AM) But really, why don't they just sign Jeff Weaver and keep their prospects? I'd imagine a team like the Nats are going to get Weaver though. Because it seems like the dodgers have been burned by the long term deals for SP's---Perez and Lowe last yr, Dreifort ]even though Colleti is new]. Plus, from their various message boards, most fans believe Weaver is a very mediocre pitcher who is similar to a guy like Tomko, and not worth a long term deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted December 25, 2005 Share Posted December 25, 2005 QUOTE(beck72 @ Dec 25, 2005 -> 10:56 PM) Because it seems like the dodgers have been burned by the long term deals for SP's---Perez and Lowe last yr, Dreifort ]even though Colleti is new]. Plus, from their various message boards, most fans believe Weaver is a very mediocre pitcher who is similar to a guy like Tomko, and not worth a long term deal. Yeah I just had a look at Weaver's stats for last season, I can see now why'd they're probably heading down that path. My reasoning before was that they might as well keep their really good prospects and try to sign a starter on the FA market. If they're going to go after a starter on the FA market, it should be Millwood, not Weaver, and even Kevin isn't the greatest bet to produce long - term under a 4 to 5 year deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 25, 2005 Share Posted December 25, 2005 QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Dec 25, 2005 -> 12:04 PM) Yeah I just had a look at Weaver's stats for last season, I can see now why'd they're probably heading down that path. My reasoning before was that they might as well keep their really good prospects and try to sign a starter on the FA market. If they're going to go after a starter on the FA market, it should be Millwood, not Weaver, and even Kevin isn't the greatest bet to produce long - term under a 4 to 5 year deal. What the dodgers need more than anything is someone to stay healthy who can be a #1-#3 SP. That's why Garland makes sense. Get him in for the yr, for a test run. He does well, they sign him to a long term deal. Esp with the NL West up for grabs, and the Dodgers trying to win in the short term with the "old timers" being signed, trading with the sox for a solid #3 SP for a few extra parts makes sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 25, 2005 Share Posted December 25, 2005 What's interesting about Weaver is KW's interest in him ever since the Sox were unable to sign him after drafting him. The interesting thing about his interest is Weaver's agent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 i think we should change the term lastest in the title to latest... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timotime Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 i cant understand why garland wants to get the hell out of chicago so badly. whatever, lets get whatever we can for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted December 27, 2005 Share Posted December 27, 2005 QUOTE(timotime @ Dec 27, 2005 -> 08:54 AM) i cant understand why garland wants to get the hell out of chicago so badly. whatever, lets get whatever we can for him. He's getting tired of all these damn "Garland trade" threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 The Garland trade threads are closed. The thread about his signing is pinned in Pale Hose Talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts