WCSox Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 04:23 PM) Check out the update to that same link now. :headshake Vazquez for Lidge and a middle-reliever sounds good to me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 "Kenny and Ozzie called him into Ozzie's office around the first weekend of March and asked if his back condition was bad enough for them to look for a reliever. He said no. Then a few weeks later the news came out in the papers that Hermanson would consider career-threatening surgery if the epidural shots didn't work. When Kenny read that, it sent him over the edge." This paragraph is why you can tell this "report" is wrong. Why? Because everyone knew about Hermanson's back condition. He's been in constant care by Hermy basically all winter. The whole group of them knew he was going to try to avoid the surgery, but the whole group knew there was no other option if rehab didn't work. So, why would Kenny be a.) surprised by talk of the surgery when the back problem came back up and b.) asking Hermanson whether or not he should bo look for a reliever in the first place? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 More proof as to why the premise of the trade made no sense, April Fool's or not... http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2006/04/carlos_lee_to_c.html What do you think? Did the Cubs overpay to get the other Lee? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 They act like Bobby Jenks died or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 QUOTE(q\/\/3r+y @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 04:24 PM) That guy knows more about baseball than cheat? Has more connections? Humorous. Haha, seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 In that White Sox article, RumorMonger (the owner of the site?) posted 'Lidge for Buehrle?". Anyone still doubt he's a moron? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 I wonder if he had to get legal clearance in order to use "MLB" as part of his web site name?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klaus kinski Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 The Cubs NEVER overpay in a trade-if they dont get something for nothing-it isnt done Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redandwhite Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 That is such a stupid website. A trade of this nature will not be done one day prior to Opening Day. I've seen more truthful rumors in my bowl of Alphabet soup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Apr 1, 2006 -> 08:55 PM) I wonder if he had to get legal clearance in order to use "MLB" as part of his web site name?? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The B stands for "bulls***." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlackSox8 Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 have to do something for april fools....even if they say it isn't a joke, it is. to unreal for something like this to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 I read about 3 pages of this thread and the only one that seems to have realistic grasp on things is JimH. The guy reports rumors folks ... RUMORS! The rumor of Lee for Murton, Hill and Guzman may have some basis. However, it may be Lee and somebody else for those 3 or Lee for two of the 3 or Lee for 2 of the 3 and and lesser prospect .... or ... they may be talking but end up not being able to come to an agreement. If that happens, then surprisingly, the trade never happens. Wow! What a concept. GM's discuss a deal, word leaks out but they GM's can't agree. So that means the rumor has been total bulls*** from the get go. Yeah right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 QUOTE(YASNY @ Apr 2, 2006 -> 06:49 AM) I read about 3 pages of this thread and the only one that seems to have realistic grasp on things is JimH. The guy reports rumors folks ... RUMORS! The rumor of Lee for Murton, Hill and Guzman may have some basis. However, it may be Lee and somebody else for those 3 or Lee for two of the 3 or Lee for 2 of the 3 and and lesser prospect .... or ... they may be talking but end up not being able to come to an agreement. If that happens, then surprisingly, the trade never happens. Wow! What a concept. GM's discuss a deal, word leaks out but they GM's can't agree. So that means the rumor has been total bulls*** from the get go. Yeah right. UPDATE: My source just got back to me with further details on Hermanson. He told me: "Kenny and Ozzie called him into Ozzie's office around the first weekend of March and asked if his back condition was bad enough for them to look for a reliever. He said no. Then a few weeks later the news came out in the papers that Hermanson would consider career-threatening surgery if the epidural shots didn't work. When Kenny read that, it sent him over the edge." Rumors, YASNY? This guy is putting things off as if they're fact, when, in all reality, they're highly questionable. Yeah, right, I'm sure Kenny expected smooth sailing with Hermanson in 2006, no problems at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Apr 2, 2006 -> 01:11 AM) Rumors, YASNY? This guy is putting things off as if they're fact, when, in all reality, they're highly questionable. Yeah, right, I'm sure Kenny expected smooth sailing with Hermanson in 2006, no problems at all. So let's examine the example you posted. He start off by saying that this what my source said. That, in itself, should tell you to take this with a grain of salt. It's hearsay. That's not 'putting things off as if they're fact'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 If Doug Melvin could get that deal straight up for Lee, he's a very, very good GM. Murton would be an excellent OF for them for the next 5 - 10 years. And really it makes sense. The Brewers are at the stage where they're close to contending, but if they can get some great young talent for a player who's probably not going to be with them 12 months from now, they should do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 (edited) If Doug Melvin could get that deal straight up for Lee, he's a very, very good GM. Murton would be an excellent OF for them for the next 5 - 10 years. And really it makes sense. The Brewers are at the stage where they're close to contending, but if they can get some great young talent for a player who's probably not going to be with them 12 months from now, they should do it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It makes sense for the Brewers but how does the fake trade make sense for the Cubs? Wood (no way they pick up his $13.5 million option), Maddux, and Wade Miller will all be free agents after this season. Who fills out the Cubs' rotation for 2007? Zambrano Prior ??? Rusch Williams The Cubs will want Angel Guzman in that 3-spot next season and they will hope that Rich Hill can also help their staff somehow. Trade three dirt-cheap players for one season of Carlos Lee? Hendry isn't that stupid. Hendry makes horrible free agent signings but he rarely gets robbed in a trade. Sure, a deal could happen between the Cubs and Brewers for Carlos Lee but it damn sure won't cost Murton, Guzman, and Hill. The Cubs are at almost $100 million in payroll with the team they currently have, which is full of holes. They will want to save money somewhere so it makes sense to keep a cheap, quality LF'er in Murton and two cheap pitchers in Guzman and Hill. Edited April 2, 2006 by SSH2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phuck the Cubs Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 I don't believe it. No way would Milwaukee trade w/in the division, let alone down I-94 with the Cubs. I haven't seen any of that crap on the Cubs site, so I know it's all a lie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 QUOTE(YASNY @ Apr 2, 2006 -> 01:49 AM) I read about 3 pages of this thread and the only one that seems to have realistic grasp on things is JimH. All April Fooling aside, let's get down to some serious trade rumor business. Not really. This is a quote from the author in his most recent White Sox rumor. He even linked the Carlos Lee to Cubs story under the words 'April Fooling'. Cheat was right from the get-go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.