iamshack Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 QUOTE (knightni @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 09:55 PM) Who can replace Hudson in the rotation? I haven't the slightest clue. I do maintain that we could see a guy like Parra coming back to though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 09:56 PM) I wonder if KW can somehow get creative and involve a 3rd team to the mix to add even more pitching for Milwaukee. This is the only scenario i can see how a deal would work w/o giving up Beckham. Also, can the White Sox involve Jared Mitchell in a deal yet? I know there is a limit on newly drafted players. Yes, Mitchell can be traded as far as I understand, but I think it's very unlikely considering he is still damaged goods at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 10:56 PM) I haven't the slightest clue. I do maintain that we could see a guy like Parra coming back to though... Do they really want to rely on guys like Parra and Garcia backing up a rotation on a team that's trying to "go for it?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatScott82 Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 09:56 PM) I haven't the slightest clue. I do maintain that we could see a guy like Parra coming back to though... Agreed. They would have in involve Parra unless we get a pitcher from a third team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 QUOTE (knightni @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 09:58 PM) Do they really want to rely on guys like Parra and Garcia backing up a rotation on a team that's trying to "go for it?" With Kenny, who knows...but I wouldn't be surprised if they would see Parra as a guy that they could get more out of than Milwaukee has... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 I've heard Chris Narveson. Bleah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 Including Mitchell, even if he could be traded, would be pretty short-sighted. Unless we felt he was never going to come back 100%, then that's the kind of move a GM who wants to do business with other teams might want to think twice about...it's a violation of the buy low/sell high maxim, selling him at perhaps his lowest possible value. And even though Sirotka/Wells happened almost 10 years ago now, some baseball personnel have long memories. Thankfully, KW has a better reputation now for bargaining in good faith, compared to his early years on the job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 QUOTE (knightni @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 09:59 PM) I've heard Chris Narveson. Bleah. Narveson's not as bad as his ERA makes him out to be. Out of everyone that the Brewers might offer us back in a Fielder trade, I'd take Parra or Narveson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 08:46 PM) If they are going to give us Fielder, my guess is the deal has to include Beckham with Hudson, Flowers for sure and maybe more. The GM will get run out of town if it's Viciedo in place of Beckham. Oddly enough, Greg is the only one that seems to hit the nail on the head. Most executives and guys with sources (also from what I've heard) have indicated any deal with Prince has to start with Beckham (or they cannot see any deal being made if the deal does not have Beckham + a prospect in it). Obviously KW will not do that. (especially with Beckham hitting again, and what we view him as) Now, I can see their asking price lowered possibly this comming off-season or by the deadline next season where a guy like Huddy would probably be the main prize (especially if he's more established, though who knows if the sox would need a 1B/DH by then) but as of right now, Prince (for us at least, maybe not other teams with better farms) is much more of a pipe dream than Adam Dunn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 QUOTE (J.Reedfan8 @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 10:49 PM) Oddly enough, Greg is the only one that seems to hit the nail on the head. Most executives and guys with sources (also from what I've heard) have indicated any deal with Prince has to start with Beckham (or they cannot see any deal being made if the deal does not have Beckham + a prospect in it). Obviously KW will not do that. (especially with Beckham hitting again, and what we view him as) Now, I can see their asking price lowered possibly this comming off-season or by the deadline next season where a guy like Huddy would probably be the main prize (especially if he's more established, though who knows if the sox would need a 1B/DH by then) but as of right now, Prince (for us at least, maybe not other teams with better farms) is much more of a pipe dream than Adam Dunn. Again, this is where the market benefits the Sox. No one wants to pay the kings ransom for Prince and the Sox could pay less for Dunn and Fielder's price only goes down from here, so they may forcer the Brewers hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 (edited) QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jul 24, 2010 -> 11:11 PM) Again, this is where the market benefits the Sox. No one wants to pay the kings ransom for Prince and the Sox could pay less for Dunn and Fielder's price only goes down from here, so they may forcer the Brewers hand. Dunn is signed for two months (possibly three for a contender) and will be a Type A free agent. Prince is signed for one year and 2 months (possibly three for a contender) and will be a Type A free agent. The Brewers will be fine in value if they hold on to Prince for the rest of the season. Edited July 25, 2010 by J.Reedfan8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 Oddly enough, Greg is the only one that seems to hit the nail on the head. Love your post and reasoning except for the first three words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 QUOTE (J.Reedfan8 @ Jul 25, 2010 -> 12:17 AM) Dunn is signed for two months (possibly three for a contender) and will be a Type A free agent This is not a guarantee. He was Type A as of a few weeks ago, but right on the cusp. The Nats can't use his Elias status the same way say the Brewers could Fielder, who is a Type A slam dunk barring injury Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatScott82 Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 QUOTE (3E8 @ Jul 25, 2010 -> 09:10 AM) This is not a guarantee. He was Type A as of a few weeks ago, but right on the cusp. The Nats can't use his Elias status the same way say the Brewers could Fielder, who is a Type A slam dunk barring injury The question is. Do the Nats or Brewers want to wait for their draft picks to develop in to major league players or do they want guys who can contribute this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 Type A compensation is nice but a couple of factors have to be thought of. First you have to offer arb. which means a healthy raise. Does a team that probably can't win next year really want to do that if there's a decent chance its accepted? Secondly, you have to draft players and give them healthy bonuses. Then you have to spend money to develop them. I'd much rather get a guy you have an even better idea about, who has been developed a little bit and has already been given his bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 Why do people keep thinking the Nats would be angry if they offered Dunn Arbitration and he accepted? Ignore for a moment the fact that he's talking about 4 years and $50 million or so...if he accepted, so he winds up on a 1 year, $13 million deal. Basically, that means the Nats get another full year of production from Dunn and have to absorb zero of the risk of signing him to a long term deal, and if they are unable to put together a winning team next year, then his contract is just as moveable as this year, and maybe they even get a better offer next year because KW has Sale and Mitchell available as trade pieces. There is absolutely zero downside to the Nats offering him arbitration. They'd be HAPPY if he accepted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted July 25, 2010 Share Posted July 25, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 25, 2010 -> 03:11 PM) Why do people keep thinking the Nats would be angry if they offered Dunn Arbitration and he accepted? Ignore for a moment the fact that he's talking about 4 years and $50 million or so...if he accepted, so he winds up on a 1 year, $13 million deal. Basically, that means the Nats get another full year of production from Dunn and have to absorb zero of the risk of signing him to a long term deal, and if they are unable to put together a winning team next year, then his contract is just as moveable as this year, and maybe they even get a better offer next year because KW has Sale and Mitchell available as trade pieces. There is absolutely zero downside to the Nats offering him arbitration. They'd be HAPPY if he accepted. Unless he just nosedives, he'd probably get $15 million in arb. Taking that and going into the same process next year is taking a lot for granted. One that Dunn's production will remain the same, another that he will remain healthy and yet another that teams will be in position to pick up $7 million or so to pay him from the end of July through the rest of the season. Of course, that's all assumming they really don't think they have a shot to win next year. If they think they have a legit shot, then I would agree, but if its still part of rebuilding, I would think they would prefer the developed prospects and the probably $10 million + savings the next calendar year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 One of the interesting things mentioned by Phil Rogers in the Trib was that he could see Bobby Jenks getting moved for the prospects to acquire a Dunn or Fielder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 25, 2010 -> 08:28 PM) One of the interesting things mentioned by Phil Rogers in the Trib was that he could see Bobby Jenks getting moved for the prospects to acquire a Dunn or Fielder. There's a team that would want him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 QUOTE (knightni @ Jul 26, 2010 -> 12:39 AM) There's a team that would want him? There's tons of rumors that teams are frustrated that there's not a lot of good relievers on the market. If the Sox pay for some of Jenks' remaining salary, I think we could get some good prospects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 QUOTE (fathom @ Jul 25, 2010 -> 07:41 PM) There's tons of rumors that teams are frustrated that there's not a lot of good relievers on the market. If the Sox pay for some of Jenks' remaining salary, I think we could get some good prospects. This would be intriguing to say the least... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eminor3rd Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 25, 2010 -> 07:28 PM) One of the interesting things mentioned by Phil Rogers in the Trib was that he could see Bobby Jenks getting moved for the prospects to acquire a Dunn or Fielder. Thats a great point. The relief market is very publicly and frustratingly thin this year with so many teams contending -- teams are knocking down the door for Scott Downs and Craig Breslow. Oh man, that would be a KW GEM. Putz moves in as closer, Fielder/Dunn becomes the new Kotsay, Jones rests Quentin when he gets hurt every 9 days. Brilliant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatScott82 Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 There are pleanty of routes KW can take to get this done. I trust KW. He's truly one of the best in the game! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macsandz Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 QUOTE (GreatScott82 @ Jul 25, 2010 -> 09:46 PM) There are pleanty of routes KW can take to get this done. I trust KW. He's truly one of the best in the game! The only way Kenny lands Fielder is if he involves a third team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerksticks Posted July 26, 2010 Share Posted July 26, 2010 QUOTE (bucket-of-suck @ Jul 25, 2010 -> 10:41 PM) The only way Kenny lands Fielder is if he involves a third team. This is awesome. Man I never thought once to involve another team with one of our bullpen pieces; we have great bullpen pieces to trade, especially with Sale needing a spot and maybe that other guy (is it Santeliz throwin smoke?) could step in. 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.