Angels May Consider Trading For Dye or Paulie

[Hawkfan]

NO WAY!!

[ScottyDo]

If you trade Paulie and not Dye then you sign Adam Dunn to play 1B.

Unless you get Weaver + Figgins (not likely but whatever), then you move Fields to 1b where he probably belongs anyway and you have a leadoff hitter. Yum.

[2nd_city_saint787]

Unless you get Weaver + Figgins (not likely but whatever), then you move Fields to 1b where he probably belongs anyway and you have a leadoff hitter. Yum.

 

 

 

Really?? why???

[Leonard Zelig]

When will we know if they are definitely going to consider it?

[elrockinMT]

please close this thread, no more pipe dream angels talks.

 

Right on.. Sounds like we are supposed to do the Angels a favor

[gsoxs1]

When will we know if they are definitely going to consider it?

 

Next Year's off-season!

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

If you trade Paulie and not Dye then you sign Adam Dunn to play 1B.

Didn't the Reds already think of that and then come to the conclusion that Dunn doesn't have the hands to play 1B?

 

Dye, if he's kept, would actually make a pretty good 1B. And Fields is mentioned, but I'd imagine the Sox would try him in LF again before they'd put him at 1B and waste his second greatest tool, which is his arm.

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

When will we know if they are definitely going to consider it?

The article said they were definitely considering it, or at least that can reasonably be implied. It says they "plan to explore the trade potential" for both players, so sounds like a bit more than possible consideration. Basically that means that the Angels have decided they will place a call, and they have also decided which number they will dial and for what reasons. That's the "plan" part. Next they will "explore," meaning a telephone will be located and a route will be drawn to it. They'll then gather provisions and take the journey. Once they reach the telephone, dial the number, and reach the desired party, they will then discuss the "trade potential," i.e. if trades are possible and what must be done in order to complete them.

 

So yes, they have definitely considered this, at least according to the author of this article, who may or may not be full of s***.

 

Edit: Maybe the thread title should be changed to "Angels Have Definitely Considered Trading For Dye & Paulie."

Edited December 11, 2008 by Kenny Hates Prospects

[DaTank]

Wouldn't mind getting Nick Adenhart from them.

 

I would. As good as he is, he had Tommy John surgery as an 18 year old...

[southsideirish71]

Isn't Weaver a Boras client. That kind of nixes that.

 

 

[SoxAce]

If we get younger and more athletic with Mr. Morales then this team will be really sexy to watch. The man has nothing to prove in the minors anymore and he is another Cuban who will fit right in. I'm honestly surprised that the Angels have soured on him so much. Give them either guy, then trade the other for all I care, let the youngins play. A first baseman who can probably steal 10+ bases himself... awesome.

 

EDIT: Not sure if this is true, Jas can probably chime in, but I heard he can play first base, third base and the outfield.

Edited December 12, 2008 by SoxAce

[caulfield12]

I would love to have Weaver on the Sox.

 

 

Let's just hope and pray it's NOT Jeff Weaver instead.

[witesoxfan]

Not that I'm necessarily going to be calling for it, but it would be funny if Gourriel came over to the US while the Sox traded for Morales and the Sox entire infield was Cuban.

[zenryan]

How about PK and Jenks for Figgins and Weaver.

 

Send Dye to Cincy for Bailey and etc.

 

Sign Abreu to play RF

 

Sign Burrell to play 1B. Played 3B in college.

 

 

Figgins 2B

Abreu RF

CQ LF

Burrell 1B

Thome DH

Alexei SS

AJ C

Fields 3B

Anderson CF

[caulfield12]

How about PK and Jenks for Figgins and Weaver.

 

Send Dye to Cincy for Bailey and etc.

 

Sign Abreu to play RF

 

Sign Burrell to play 1B. Played 3B in college.

 

 

Figgins 2B

Abreu RF

CQ LF

Burrell 1B

Thome DH

Alexei SS

AJ C

Fields 3B

Anderson CF

 

 

Two problems.

 

I don't think the Angels would ever admit defeat and embarassment and go to the trouble of reacquiring Jenks...especially when Arredondo is prepped to be their new closer.

 

While Konerko is a possibly if TEX gets away, I don't think Jenks is remotely close to their radar.

 

Without Jenks as part of the deal, we'd probably have to take Figgins...as Weaver would be off the table due to his "bargain" status as a pitcher in years 1-6.

 

If we really wanted to clear payroll, I guess it would be a decent move, but I really think Konerko's going to have a great 2009 and Figgins is aging/injury-prone/defensively-inept.

 

I could live with it, but I think there are much better moves out there...especially if we are patient. We might even find a solution from one of the non-tendered players out there and not have to give up any talent in return.

 

 

[witesoxfan]

I understand the concept of shopping Jenks, but you don't trade him in a package. The bullpen had enough issues last year and trading away the best reliever of the bunch, even with diminishing peripherals, would drastically hurt the bullpen. I can easily see Jenks being traded after 09 or 10, but this year just doesn't make a lot of sense unless someone wows you, and I don't see that happening with Fuentes, Hoffman, and Cruz still on the free agent market and the teams needing closers winding down quickly.

[caulfield12]

Not to mention the availabilty of Valverde and Wigginton due to apparent fisccal constraints imposed by Drayton McLane.

 

Then there's also the crowd of former closers like Isringhausen, Cordero, Gagne, Brandon Lyon (also Type A, along with J. Cruz), etc.

[spiderman]

Personally I'd rather trade Paulie than Dye, but either is fine. I hope Paulie gets his head out of his ass this upcoming season.

I'd be very surprised if the Angels took Konerko. He's been in a 2 year rut, is making $12 million this year and next year. Why trade for a guy making big money who may be on the downside of his career?

[caulfield12]

I'd be very surprised if the Angels took Konerko. He's been in a 2 year rut, is making $12 million this year and next year. Why trade for a guy making big money who may be on the downside of his career?

 

 

1) Proven record of playoff success

2) Also proved he was healthy (finally) the last six weeks of the aeason and got his "normal" power back

3) Is a comparative bargain with TEX at $20 million PLUS

4) Has been targeted for years by Angels

5) Has rededicated himself this offseason to better training, conditioning and nutrition for the first time in his big league career

6) Good "buy lower" candidate...wouldn't have to give up as much in return

7) Two year contract not as scary as 3-7 year deals for certain big-name FA's

 

[Hatchetman]

The FA market for 1B is super thin, so maybe the Angels would be desperate. I don't see anyone taking Konerko's contract though.

[heirdog]

1) Proven record of playoff success

2) Also proved he was healthy (finally) the last six weeks of the aeason and got his "normal" power back

3) Is a comparative bargain with TEX at $20 million PLUS

4) Has been targeted for years by Angels

5) Has rededicated himself this offseason to better training, conditioning and nutrition for the first time in his big league career

6) Good "buy lower" candidate...wouldn't have to give up as much in return

7) Two year contract not as scary as 3-7 year deals for certain big-name FA's

 

I think you just basically summed up why the White Sox should keep him...

[eickevinmorris]

First Edwin Jackson, and now Nick Adenhart?! What is with this overvaluing of downright putrid pitchers? The guy put up a 1.71 WHIP this season. He had a 110/75 K/BB ratio. Hell, he wasn't very good in 2007 either. I'd be kinda surprised if he sniffs any top 100 lists.

[Fotop]

First Edwin Jackson, and now Nick Adenhart?! What is with this overvaluing of downright putrid pitchers? The guy put up a 1.71 WHIP this season. He had a 110/75 K/BB ratio. Hell, he wasn't very good in 2007 either. I'd be kinda surprised if he sniffs any top 100 lists.

 

He's 21 years old. He certainly has time to figure it out, especially considering his stuff.

 

Think it's pretty unfair you're writing a kid his age, with his raw ability, off as "putrid" so early.

 

Ultimately, this discussion is likely pointless as Adenhart is most likely untouchable - as he should be.

[eickevinmorris]

He's 21 years old. He certainly has time to figure it out, especially considering his stuff.

 

Think it's pretty unfair you're writing a kid his age, with his raw ability, off as "putrid" so early.

 

Ultimately, this discussion is likely pointless as Adenhart is most likely untouchable - as he should be.

What makes him untouchable? He's sucked for two years straight now and has lost a ton of luster. He was heralded coming into this season, and 2007, and has shown nothing. He's taken three steps backward, if anything.

[lostfan]

Right on.. Sounds like we are supposed to do the Angels a favor

Huh? Have you seen some of the ridiculous trade proposals in the past?

 

You can summarize them as follows.

Sox get: Chone Figgins + 2 MLB-ready starters

Angels get: Paul Konerko after a terrible season

 

That's the opposite of doing the Angels a favor.

Edited December 12, 2008 by lostfan