fathom Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 At least we're one step closer to improving our double play combo, which I still believe cost us 5-7 games due to inability to turn crucial double plays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Its also possible the Sox didnt want Getz on the team and this was the best offer they could find... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scenario Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 I say we nix the Jayson/Chris debate before it getz ridiculous. Â Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny Hates Prospects Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 12:04 PM) Well there is a reason we agree most of the time!!! Then do you agree with this? My immediate thought upon looking at Teahen's salary was, "how much would it suck if Beltre or Hudson end up signing for about $6M?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 12:07 PM) Its also possible the Sox didnt want Getz on the team and this was the best offer they could find... Â Thinking about the WSI/Gonzalez interview, and knowing how much crying Fields did while he was here, that makes a lot of sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (scenario @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 12:08 PM) I say we nix the Jayson/Chris debate before it getz ridiculous. Woah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 12:07 PM) At least we're one step closer to improving our double play combo, which I still believe cost us 5-7 games due to inability to turn crucial double plays. You lost me here. Who are you saying was the problem there, and who do you think will be at what positions now? Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 10:07 AM) Its also possible the Sox didnt want Getz on the team and this was the best offer they could find... I just can't see that being the case. Why would the brass have raved about him all season (maybe not rave, but they talked him up pretty good) only to get rid of him because of what Mark Gonzalez said. Â Sounds to me like Getz is the solution and some of the lame ass veterans were the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 12:07 PM) I hate all the leadoff hitter talk. Leadoff hitters hit once a game, for one thing. For another thing, OBP trumps speed, you don't HAVE to have a speedster at the top. And most importantly, its just not smart to acquire players based on hitting slot specifically, because you essentially corner yourself in the market and limit your possibilities. This is the same in any line of business. You don't go recruit people that are ideal for a fourth of their job, you recruit people that are best overall for the WHOLE job. You assemble the best 9 guys you can, then make the lineup from there. Couldn't agree with you more. The line-up will shake out, there's never a point in signing a lesser player because he theoretically fills a certain spot "better." Same thing with BPs, it's better to have a RH dominant BP if they are better pitchers than sticking a crappy LHP in there just for the sake of having one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny Hates Prospects Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (scenario @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 12:08 PM) I say we nix the Jayson/Chris debate before it getz ridiculous. Very well done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 12:08 PM) Then do you agree with this? My immediate thought upon looking at Teahen's salary was, "how much would it suck if Beltre or Hudson end up signing for about $6M?" Apparently Beltre is a boras client so it doesn't matter anyway. I agree about Hudson though, that'd make me a sad panda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (fathom @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 12:07 PM) At least we're one step closer to improving our double play combo, which I still believe cost us 5-7 games due to inability to turn crucial double plays. Not if they see Teahen as an answer at 2B. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderBolt Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (scenario @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 01:08 PM) I say we nix the Jayson/Chris debate before it getz ridiculous. You can take me in a manly fashion after this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ILMOU Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (JoeCredeYes @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 10:55 AM) This trade blows. Getz is a better player than Teahen. Teahen would be a nice asset to have off your bench, but for close to 4mil, that's not what he's here for. Don't like it one bit. Â I agree with this, unfortunately. Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (Kenny Hates Prospects @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 10:08 AM) Then do you agree with this? My immediate thought upon looking at Teahen's salary was, "how much would it suck if Beltre or Hudson end up signing for about $6M?" Ya, I think I just commented how 4M could pretty much get you one of Hudson/Polanco (maybe add 1-3M). 2B don't make a done unless your Chase Utley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 10:07 AM) I hate all the leadoff hitter talk. Leadoff hitters hit once a game, for one thing. For another thing, OBP trumps speed, you don't HAVE to have a speedster at the top. And most importantly, its just not smart to acquire players based on hitting slot specifically, because you essentially corner yourself in the market and limit your possibilities. This is the same in any line of business. You don't go recruit people that are ideal for a fourth of their job, you recruit people that are best overall for the WHOLE job. You assemble the best 9 guys you can, then make the lineup from there. Who do the Sox have with a legit shot at putting up a quality OBP out of the leadoff spot, without moving one of the guys who ought to be a major run producer lower in the order (i.e. Beckham) there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Its true the Sox liked Getz, but management can turn on its favorite employees in a second. Â There has to be some motivation behind this trade, and it simply cant be: Â Teahan is the best 4mil player available. Â Which makes me believe that the trade had more to do with the players we sent, then the player we received. Teahan seems to be a player we are taking a chance with. He has had good stats at UCF, and maybe they believe he can finally reach the potential people thought he had. Â It would seem that Getz would have more value, but I just dont see KW as the type of GM that doesnt explore every option before making a deal. My guess is he called every team with this package and only KC had any real interest. Â Thats all merely speculation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 12:13 PM) Who do the Sox have with a legit shot at putting up a quality OBP out of the leadoff spot, without moving one of the guys who ought to be a major run producer lower in the order (i.e. Beckham) there? If they get another run producer, for one year only, I wouldn't mind seeing Beckham there, again, for one year only Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 12:13 PM) Its true the Sox liked Getz, but management can turn on its favorite employees in a second. There has to be some motivation behind this trade, and it simply cant be:  Teahan is the best 4mil player available.  Which makes me believe that the trade had more to do with the players we sent, then the player we received. Teahan seems to be a player we are taking a chance with. He has had good stats at UCF, and maybe they believe he can finally reach the potential people thought he had.  It would seem that Getz would have more value, but I just dont see KW as the type of GM that doesnt explore every option before making a deal. My guess is he called every team with this package and only KC had any real interest.  Thats all merely speculation. All good points, also it's one day after the WS ended, I don't see KW being done at least exploring other moves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Teahen isn't special, but neither is Getz. Fields needed a change of scenery and I'm assuming the Royals though Teahen did too. Kenny likes who he likes and he doesn't care what you think (right or wrong). What the Sox and Ozzie likes is flexibility in his line-ups. He likes players that play multiple positions and Teahen IS that player. Kotsay IS that player. Fields sorta was when he picked up 1B and Getz is NOT. Teahen can play 5 or 6 positions, maybe not all well, but he can in a pinch. Better than Dye at SS or Hall at first, that's for sure. Â Yeah, he's a little more expensive, but as has been said, one high salary player is probably gone at some point this off-season. Relax people, this is move #2 of a long off-season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 10:13 AM) Its true the Sox liked Getz, but management can turn on its favorite employees in a second. There has to be some motivation behind this trade, and it simply cant be:  Teahan is the best 4mil player available.  Which makes me believe that the trade had more to do with the players we sent, then the player we received. Teahan seems to be a player we are taking a chance with. He has had good stats at UCF, and maybe they believe he can finally reach the potential people thought he had.  It would seem that Getz would have more value, but I just dont see KW as the type of GM that doesnt explore every option before making a deal. My guess is he called every team with this package and only KC had any real interest.  Thats all merely speculation. So if thats the case, do the Sox threaten to non-tender Teahen and use the 4M elsewhere? Or get Teahen to agree to a contract at less than he was paid this year, knowing damn well that if he doesn't accept the offer, that the Sox will non-tender him and he'll be a UFA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
striker Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 What Kenny acquired was a versatile LH bat. The guy can play like 5 positions. That means we can put Teahen at 2B and try and sign a RF. Or put Teahen in RF and try and sign a 2B. Teahen is no star but I bet he'll perform better with a change of scenery. Â Interesting that KW picked up another underachieving 1st rounder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 I loved Getz as a utility player dont get me wrong, but I think some of you are way over-reacting... Teahen is a better offensive player and although he has had his ups and downs we acquired a better player today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cali Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 If Getz was traded for the reasons Gonzalez mentioned, that is VERY disturbing to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThunderBolt Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 QUOTE (striker62704 @ Nov 5, 2009 -> 01:16 PM) Interesting that KW picked up another underachieving 1st rounder. That was my thought too. Teahen had a heck of a lot draft hype. 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.