Juan Pierre owed 18.5M over the next two years, Linebrink 10.5M so we would have to take on 8M over the next two years which doesn't seem unreasonable since it would fill the hole in the OF and at leadoff. Probably have to throw in a prospect or two, I was thinking Torres or another AAAA starter since they seem to want pitching.

 

http://twitter.com/stevehenson333/status/6416431930

Edited December 7, 200916 yr by ChiSox420*

Juan Pierre owed 18.5M over the next two years, Linebrink 10.5M so we would have to take on 8.5M over the next two years which doesn't seem unreasonable since it would fill the whole in the OF and at leadoff. Probably have to throw in a prospect or two, I was thinking Torres or another AAAA starter since they seem to want pitching.

 

http://twitter.com/stevehenson333/status/6416431930

 

Opps... he is fast though...Who would you take two Jermaine Dyes in RF/CF or one Juan Pierre doing both

Edited December 7, 200916 yr by ChiSox420*

Dodgers pay for half the difference I wouldn't mind it.

No, thank you. Nope. We need to compensate for about 45 homeruns-worth of power that we've lost, Pierre is not the go to guy for that.

Nope, do not need.

Juan Pierre owed 18.5M over the next two years, Linebrink 10.5M so we would have to take on 8M over the next two years which doesn't seem unreasonable since it would fill the hole in the OF and at leadoff. Probably have to throw in a prospect or two, I was thinking Torres or another AAAA starter since they seem to want pitching.

 

http://twitter.com/stevehenson333/status/6416431930

wasn't this already talked about before ? you guys must be bored in your life's to bring up same old trades senerios that make no sense anyway .

Ugh. This hurts. But it still wouldn't surprise me either. There would be more involved, as I don't think the Sox want to spend that much money in one spot.

Who else is out there though?

Or maybe for the difference in salary we could just sign 2 of Coco Crisp/Yasser Gomez/Leslie Anderson and let them battle Jordan Danks and Alejandro De Aza for the lead-off spot.

 

The main reason we would want Linebrink gone is to clear some salary space to improve the 2010-11 teams. Taking on an even more expensive bad contract probably isn't going to help us do that unless the guy we're taking on is a pretty damn good player who fills a need. If Pierre had the arm for CF I'd make the deal, but he doesn't, and the thought of a Pierre-Rios-Quentin or Quentin-Pierre-Rios outfield makes me want to puke.

Jordan Danks will NOT be our leadoff hitter in April 2010. Even if he were to make the team, Guillen will put him down the order, like he always does with rookie.

Who else is out there though?

Yeah, I'd take Podsednik/Crisp (assuming he's healthy enough to play) and Linebrink over Pierre.

Personally I think that Pierre gets a bad rap. I don't think that, other than his arm, he is that bad a ballplayer. Sure his contract isn't good, but how many players in MLB with more than 6 - 7 years of experience have "good" contracts. Ozzie seems to like him so maybe he does possess some type of intangible that may help a winning team. Pierre has been on what, for the most part, has been winning ballclubs in L.A. and while being primarily a bench player I haven't heard anything about him being disruptive. I'm sure that Ozzie has requested some type of a typical lead off hitter and for what is actually available I think that you could do a lot worse.

 

For those in the know, Pierre can still cover ground in the outfield can't he?

 

If the Dodgers are in the financial bind that people are claiming and don't want to give cash in a Pierre - Linebrink swap, maybe K.W. can get them to part with a good prospect or 2. JMHO.

Edited December 7, 200916 yr by balfanman

Personally I think that Pierre gets a bad rap. I don't think that, other than his arm, he is that bad a ballplayer. Sure his contract isn't good, but how many players in MLB with more than 6 - 7 years of experience have "good" contracts. Ozzie seems to like him so maybe he does possess some type of intangible that may help a winning team. Pierre has been on what, for the most part, has been winning ballclubs in L.A. and while being primarily a bench player I haven't heard anything about him being disruptive. I'm sure that Ozzie has requested some type of a typical lead off hitter and for what is actually available I think that you could do a lot worse.

 

For those in the know, Pierre can still cover ground in the outfield can't he?

 

If the Dodgers are in the financiakl bind that people are claiming and don't want to give cash in a Pierre - Linebrink swap, maybe K.W. can get them to part with a good prospect or 2. JMHO.

 

Not exactly sure how to interpret this but according to fangraphs his UZR/150 was 10.5 for OF but -19.4 in CF, to have that rating wouldn't he have to be pretty good in LF to cancel out CF???

 

Also while he makes 10M this year his salary drops to 8.5M in '11 making him an easier piece to move if he doesn't work out.

Edited December 7, 200916 yr by ChiSox420*

We already went the route of a fast outfielder with a puss arm

Personally I think that Pierre gets a bad rap. I don't think that, other than his arm, he is that bad a ballplayer. Sure his contract isn't good, but how many players in MLB with more than 6 - 7 years of experience have "good" contracts. Ozzie seems to like him so maybe he does possess some type of intangible that may help a winning team. Pierre has been on what, for the most part, has been winning ballclubs in L.A. and while being primarily a bench player I haven't heard anything about him being disruptive. I'm sure that Ozzie has requested some type of a typical lead off hitter and for what is actually available I think that you could do a lot worse.

 

For those in the know, Pierre can still cover ground in the outfield can't he?

 

If the Dodgers are in the financial bind that people are claiming and don't want to give cash in a Pierre - Linebrink swap, maybe K.W. can get them to part with a good prospect or 2. JMHO.

He's made the playoffs 3 times in his career and the last 2 times were as a part time player so he got a total of 7 PA in 4 rounds of playoff action, I'm not paying for intangibles that likely do not exist. His combined line over the past 4 years going into last season was .286/.329/.359/.688, that's awful especially for the price it'd cost to get and pay him. A .43 isoD and a .73 ISO, that's a bench player not your top man in plate appearances.

Hardly surprising, I'd take it with a grain of salt:

 

http://twitter.com/JoeFrisaro/status/6443042775

 

#Pirates Also heard Juan Pierre has drawn interest from Pirates, White Sox and an third unidentified team.

Eh, I'd rather have Crisp than Pierre since he's much cheaper. Pierre's been a leadoff hitter all his life and he's never eclipsed 60 walks, that's horrible. If we want a leadoff man who will get on base, you do not get Pierre, especially considering he's going to cost you money and a player in return. They're pretty much the same in terms of speed and defense. Pierre is obviously faster than Crisp, but Crisp's defense is better.

Or maybe for the difference in salary we could just sign 2 of Coco Crisp/Yasser Gomez/Leslie Anderson and let them battle Jordan Danks and Alejandro De Aza for the lead-off spot.

 

The main reason we would want Linebrink gone is to clear some salary space to improve the 2010-11 teams. Taking on an even more expensive bad contract probably isn't going to help us do that unless the guy we're taking on is a pretty damn good player who fills a need. If Pierre had the arm for CF I'd make the deal, but he doesn't, and the thought of a Pierre-Rios-Quentin or Quentin-Pierre-Rios outfield makes me want to puke.

 

Why would you puke? Pierre was a well above average LF last season.

Eh, I'd rather have Crisp than Pierre since he's much cheaper. Pierre's been a leadoff hitter all his life and he's never eclipsed 60 walks, that's horrible. If we want a leadoff man who will get on base, you do not get Pierre, especially considering he's going to cost you money and a player in return. They're pretty much the same in terms of speed and defense. Pierre is obviously faster than Crisp, but Crisp's defense is better.

 

Pierre is a career .301 hitter. - He gets on base. He would cost quite a bit more than Crisp, though.

He's made the playoffs 3 times in his career and the last 2 times were as a part time player so he got a total of 7 PA in 4 rounds of playoff action, I'm not paying for intangibles that likely do not exist. His combined line over the past 4 years going into last season was .286/.329/.359/.688, that's awful especially for the price it'd cost to get and pay him. A .43 isoD and a .73 ISO, that's a bench player not your top man in plate appearances.

 

Why would you completely eliminate last season from your assessment? He had a nice season both at the plate and in LF.

 

"For those in the know, Pierre can still cover ground in the outfield can't he? "

 

Yeah, but he should stay in LF.

 

Why would you completely eliminate last season from your assessment? He had a nice season both at the plate and in LF.

Because I don't change my opinion on players based on one partial season, a good 400 PA season doesn't erase the previous 4 bad ones. I'm not going to buy high on an incredibly expensive 32 year old with a well documented track record of mediocrity, that's how a lot these teams in financial trouble accumulate bad contracts.

Pierre is a career .301 hitter. - He gets on base. He would cost quite a bit more than Crisp, though.

Yeah, a career .301 hitter who before last season hadn't put up an OBP north of .331 since 2004. He has a career 5.8% walk rate and a 0.72 ISO, that's not exactly what you're looking for from the guy who will get the most plate appearances on your team.

Because I don't change my opinion on players based on one partial season, a good 400 PA season doesn't erase the previous 4 bad ones. I'm not going to buy high on an incredibly expensive 32 year old with a well documented track record of mediocrity, that's how a lot these teams in financial trouble accumulate bad contracts.

I was anxiously awaiting your response because I had the same knee-jerk question; sometimes we are to quick to jump at positive numbers when we need to look at the big picture. I think your point about how teams "accumulate bad contracts" is often ignored.