PDA

View Full Version : Orlando Hudson Signing: What are our odds?


btrain929
10-20-2008, 10:27 AM
We've heard for awhile now from Lip, as well as us putting 2 and 2 together, that we are very interested in signing Orlando Hudson to be our 2B for the near future. I think he does a lot of things well, and would welcome this acquisition. The main question that always comes to mind is, who will be our competition? Who could pull a Torii Hunter and outbid us at the last second? I put together a list of teams that might also be in the market for a 2B, and might go after Hudson. You guys can feel free to add on if you want. But personally, I think we might have a serious shot at signing him.

-CLE: The Josh Barfield experiment might officially be over. If they aren't too confident in Andy Marte, I could see them moving Peralta to 3B and giving SS to Asdrubal Cabrera. If that's the case, they'll be looking for a 2B. If Peralta stays at SS, and they feel Cabrera needs to continue to learn and grow, then he'll stay at 2B and then they won't be a factor.

-KC: Lately, they've been good for one, maybe 2 big signings per offseason. Grudz is gone, Aviles is at short. If they acquire a SS (Furcal, etc), Aviles can move to 2B. If Aviles stays, it'll all come down to their comfort level in Alberto Callaspo. He actually put up good numbers in 200 ab's last year (.300/.360), so maybe they are content with him. But if not, Hudson can be their big signing for the '09 offseason.

-LAD: I think they may be one of our biggest competitors for Hudson. Kent's contract is over with, and Blake Dewitt might move back to 3B with Blake and Laroche now out of the picture. They have guys like Hu and Abreu who might fill in at 3B or 2B, but that might not be good enough for LA. With them losing many players to FA this offseason, they will have the money to bring him in.

-MIL: This all depends on their happiness with Rickie Weeks. They DID go out and get Ray Durham at the end of the year. Weeks hit around .230 last year, so they'd be foolish not to look to upgrade. They, also, will be having money come off the books next year, and Hudson's veteran presence for a full year might be what that team needs to push them over the top.

-MIN: Alexi Casilla is the classic Twin, and he did decent this year at 2B. With MIN not really ever being big spenders in the FA market, I don't see them as a serious threat, but Hudson would clearly be an upgrade.

-NYM: Another team that I don't consider a serious threat, but I keep hearing rumblings about NYM trying to move Castillo. If that happens, then they shoot up the charts as one of the favorites.

-SD: I don't know where they plan on playing Antonelli or if he's a shoe-in to start '09 on the big league team, and they also have Edgar Gonzalez. They have a need at 2B, but they might be heading into rebuild mode if they trade Peavy. In that case, signing Hudson would be counterproductive with what they are trying to do as a franchise. They are a minimal threat.

-SF: They have a bunch of youngens running around the middle infield (Burriss, Frandsen, Velez). Burriss and Velez would be the main guys competing for 2B, but SF is another team that isn't shy to throw some cash around. They have a nice pitching nucleus, so they might be looking to make a splash offensively to help balance out their team. Hudson would do just that.

-STL: Adam Kennedy is signed thru 2009, so their main focus may be SS and Furcal. But Kennedy isn't an outstanding option, so if they could land a Hudson, they'd have no problem putting Kennedy on the bench with Ryan.

So overall, that's 9 teams. I would really only consider a handful of them as serious contenders (LAD, MIL, SF, KC). Initially I thought there might be a bigger market for them. But if we can fight off LAD, MIL, and SF doesn't throw 6 years at him, I think we have a good shot at signing Hudson.

ChiSoxFan81
10-20-2008, 10:40 AM
I've heard the Cubs could be a player. After all, they've been trying to pry away Brian Roberts for a year. If that continues to be unproductive, look for them to take a stab at Hudson.

btrain929
10-20-2008, 10:42 AM
I've heard the Cubs could be a player. After all, they've been trying to pry away Brian Roberts for a year. If that continues to be unproductive, look for them to take a stab at Hudson.

I considered them for awhile as well. I just don't think they'll bench/AAA Fukudome and put Derosa in RF to make that happen. Plus he doesn't fill their need of a true leadoff hitter. They already have a #2 hitter in Theriot. Since I put teams like MIN and SD on the list, I guess you could put the Cubs on there as well.

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 10:52 AM
I hope we have little interest in Hudson. His game will not play well at USCF, all of his success has been in the NL, and he is injury prone. I'm all for a Getz/Grudzielanek transition year before Beckham claims either SS or 2B. There's no need for Hudson on this ballclub.

cbrownson13
10-20-2008, 10:53 AM
I considered them for awhile as well. I just don't think they'll bench/AAA Fukudome and put Derosa in RF to make that happen. Plus he doesn't fill their need of a true leadoff hitter. They already have a #2 hitter in Theriot. Since I put teams like MIN and SD on the list, I guess you could put the Cubs on there as well.


Until he's gone, Soriano is the leadoff hitter for the Cubs.

btrain929
10-20-2008, 10:55 AM
I hope we have little interest in Hudson. His game will not play well at USCF, all of his success has been in the NL, and he is injury prone. I'm all for a Getz/Grudzielanek transition year before Beckham claims either SS or 2B. There's no need for Hudson on this ballclub.

Hudson did okay in TOR, so it wouldn't be a COMPLETE transition from a career NL'er. But how can you say he's injury prone, then suggest Grudz? :scratch:

getonbckthr
10-20-2008, 10:56 AM
I hope our odds are 0%.

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 10:59 AM
Hudson did okay in TOR, so it wouldn't be a COMPLETE transition from a career NL'er. But how can you say he's injury prone, then suggest Grudz? :scratch:
Because Grudz would simply be the caddy/occasional platoon partner for Getz. We wouldn't be investing a ton in Grudzielanek and we'd be expecting minimal playing time.

Hudson was never as good in TOR as he was in AZ.

I can't think of any reason why we should sign Hudson for 3-4 years with Beckham waiting in the wings and a solid player in Getz ready for a part time role. There's a better use of resources, I'm sure.

btrain929
10-20-2008, 11:09 AM
Because Grudz would simply be the caddy/occasional platoon partner for Getz. We wouldn't be investing a ton in Grudzielanek and we'd be expecting minimal playing time.

Hudson was never as good in TOR as he was in AZ.

I can't think of any reason why we should sign Hudson for 3-4 years with Beckham waiting in the wings and a solid player in Getz ready for a part time role. There's a better use of resources, I'm sure.

Beckham isn't a for-sure thing, he's a few years away, and I bet KW would be more tempted to use him as trade bait for a legit major leaguer then groom him on the big league level. That's his M.O.

I guess I wouldn't mind the Getz/Grudz combo, but only if that's plan C or D. I wouldn't want us heading into the winter meetings saying "nope, we're fine at 2B."

munchman33
10-20-2008, 11:23 AM
While I'm sure the organization is high on him (and they have every reason to be), I think there's very little chance we cough up the funds necessary to sign him.

getonbckthr
10-20-2008, 11:23 AM
I prefer Grudz to Hudson.

munchman33
10-20-2008, 11:23 AM
I prefer Grudz to Hudson.

That's just ridiculous. Hudson is a better hitter, has a better eye, and is ten times the defender.

Lip Man 1
10-20-2008, 11:25 AM
Because Beckham will be playing 3rd base for the White Sox in the future. I seriously doubt he'll remain at second and Getz is at least two years away from even sniffing a starting job, unless something extreme happens.

It may not be Hudson but I can almost guarantee it won't be Getz from what I'm being told.

Lip

hellview
10-20-2008, 11:27 AM
The Mets will unload Castillo for another bad contract and sign Hudson.

munchman33
10-20-2008, 11:30 AM
Because Beckham will be playing 3rd base for the White Sox in the future. I seriously doubt he'll remain at second and Getz is at least two years away from even sniffing a starting job, unless something extreme happens.

It may not be Hudson but I can almost guarantee it won't be Getz from what I'm being told.

Lip

Billy Beane came to me in a dream and told me Getz would win the OPS+ AND ERA+ titles next year.

munchman33
10-20-2008, 11:30 AM
The Mets will unload Castillo for another bad contract and sign Hudson.

I've been hearing the same thing.

Gammons Peter
10-20-2008, 11:31 AM
Because Beckham will be playing 3rd base for the White Sox in the future. I seriously doubt he'll remain at second and Getz is at least two years away from even sniffing a starting job, unless something extreme happens.

It may not be Hudson but I can almost guarantee it won't be Getz from what I'm being told.

Lip


Told by who? Sorry but I don't remember what connections you have.

chaerulez
10-20-2008, 11:37 AM
Because Beckham will be playing 3rd base for the White Sox in the future. I seriously doubt he'll remain at second and Getz is at least two years away from even sniffing a starting job, unless something extreme happens.

It may not be Hudson but I can almost guarantee it won't be Getz from what I'm being told.

Lip

If Getz is two years away from starting I'm thinking he's just not a starter period. He's already 24. I'm not one of those if he's not an everyday player by age 22 he must suck guys, but a guy not being a regular until age 26 isn't the norm.

I don't understand why people don't like Hudson. He plays at a gold glove level at second and would be a good #2 hitter on the team.

btrain929
10-20-2008, 11:45 AM
The Mets will unload Castillo for another bad contract and sign Hudson.

I've been hearing the same thing.

Easier said than done. IF they are able to trade him before Hudson signs elsewhere, they I agree they are a favorite. But that is a big hurdle they have to overcome first.

NLaloosh
10-20-2008, 11:47 AM
I don't see Kenny giving Hudson the contract that he likely ends up with. And, I hope that he doesn't.

He's a good player but he doesn't make the team that much better and not for those dollars. Plus, he has durability issues.

I see a trade coming for a second baseman. Although, I'd rather not see Fields back I think that we might.

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 12:07 PM
Because Beckham will be playing 3rd base for the White Sox in the future. I seriously doubt he'll remain at second and Getz is at least two years away from even sniffing a starting job, unless something extreme happens.

It may not be Hudson but I can almost guarantee it won't be Getz from what I'm being told.

Lip
1. Beckham's a SS. The fact that you don't even know what position he currently plays tells me I shouldn't trust your opinion that he'll move to 3B. Why won't he move to 3rd? Because he's fine in the middle IF and his bat doesn't translate as well at 3rd base. If he stays in the infield he's a positive offensively, if he moves to 3rd, he compares to a poor man's Corey Koskie.

2. There's no reason to believe it won't be Getz. The 2b market is average at best and signing a caddy like Grudz or sticking with Uribe wouldn't kill us.
Billy Beane came to me in a dream and told me Getz would win the OPS+ AND ERA+ titles next year.

Sweet. Tear down pretty basic statistics. I don't know that Getz will be good-great, I just am pretty sure I don't want to throw money at Hudson or trade for a 2b when there's an adequate LH 2b sitting in the organization.

Lip, if Getz is two years away from starting, what do you call his performance in AAA this year?

btrain929
10-20-2008, 12:09 PM
1. Beckham's a SS. The fact that you don't even know what position he currently plays tells me I shouldn't trust your opinion that he'll move to 3B. Why won't he move to 3rd? Because he's fine in the middle IF and his bat doesn't translate as well at 3rd base. If he stays in the infield he's a positive offensively, if he moves to 3rd, he compares to a poor man's Corey Koskie.

2. There's no reason to believe it won't be Getz. The 2b market is average at best and signing a caddy like Grudz or sticking with Uribe wouldn't kill us.

Sweet. Tear down pretty basic statistics. I don't know that Getz will be good-great, I just am pretty sure I don't want to throw money at Hudson or trade for a 2b when there's an adequate LH 2b sitting in the organization.

Lip, if Getz is two years away from starting, what do you call his performance in AAA this year?

I'm pretttttttty sure he knows he plays SS, and is just predicting that Beckham moves to 3B in the future.

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 12:46 PM
I'm pretttttttty sure he knows he plays SS, and is just predicting that Beckham moves to 3B in the future.
Wrong. He explicitly states that he doesn't expect Beckham to remain at 2b.

Also, Beckham will not be traded. KW has never had a (positional) prospect near as good as Gordon. He's pretty much the most "sure thing" guy from that draft class.

champagne030
10-20-2008, 01:32 PM
Wrong. He explicitly states that he doesn't expect Beckham to remain at 2b.



Well, you're the one that put him at 2nd base. There's several scouting reports that suggest Beckham will need to move from SS to either 2nd or 3rd. And his bat translates just fine to 3rd. He's got the power to hit 25. Corie Koskie? Really? I guess if your memory is of 2001......

NLaloosh
10-20-2008, 01:33 PM
Grebeck, Getz will not be the starting 2B next year for the Sox. That's quite obvious to all but you. And, I would be very happy to make any wager that you care to about that situation.

munchman33
10-20-2008, 01:50 PM
2. There's no reason to believe it won't be Getz. The 2b market is average at best and signing a caddy like Grudz or sticking with Uribe wouldn't kill us.

Sweet. Tear down pretty basic statistics. I don't know that Getz will be good-great, I just am pretty sure I don't want to throw money at Hudson or trade for a 2b when there's an adequate LH 2b sitting in the organization.

Lip, if Getz is two years away from starting, what do you call his performance in AAA this year?

Minor league numbers in a hitter friendly park are not the most important thing. Especially when you're talking about a guy whose numbers are only okay because of OBP, which is easier to rack up against minor league starters who very often struggle with control.

Sometimes you just have to look at more than the numbers. Ask yourself how well Getz's swing, eye, and plate approach will translate to the major league game. I think it will, but probably not in a star capacity. He's a fringe kind of guy. I'd rather he wasn't the first, second, or third option to start this offseason. He needs to prove himself at the major league level first, because nothing about him screams "It's my time." It seems like the White Sox agree with me.

esbrechtel
10-20-2008, 01:56 PM
Wrong. He explicitly states that he doesn't expect Beckham to remain at 2b.

Also, Beckham will not be traded. KW has never had a (positional) prospect near as good as Gordon. He's pretty much the most "sure thing" guy from that draft class.


With almost 2000 posts I figured you would know that Lip is one of the more reliable sources and He knows his baseball, I am sure that something got lost in translation...

hellview
10-20-2008, 02:05 PM
Also, Beckham will not be traded. KW has never had a (positional) prospect near as good as Gordon. He's pretty much the most "sure thing" guy from that draft class.

If Beckham was the most "sure thing" from that draft class he would have gone highier then 7.

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 02:12 PM
If Beckham was the most "sure thing" from that draft class he would have gone highier then 7.
Not true. Teams don't always draft on "sure thing" ability -- it is more about high(er) ceiling and position for other people. Look at the Rays -- Tim Beckham is a raw SS out of high school.

Minor league numbers in a hitter friendly park are not the most important thing. Especially when you're talking about a guy whose numbers are only okay because of OBP, which is easier to rack up against minor league starters who very often struggle with control.

Sometimes you just have to look at more than the numbers. Ask yourself how well Getz's swing, eye, and plate approach will translate to the major league game. I think it will, but probably not in a star capacity. He's a fringe kind of guy. I'd rather he wasn't the first, second, or third option to start this offseason. He needs to prove himself at the major league level first, because nothing about him screams "It's my time." It seems like the White Sox agree with me.
In what I'm saying it isn't like they'd be operating without a back-up plan. I'm not saying they should give Getz the job totally, I'm saying he should get the majority of the ABs with a right-handed veteran spotting him and taking over should things go awry. I'd say, for next season, 3b and CF are far more important holes to fill than 2B.
Grebeck, Getz will not be the starting 2B next year for the Sox. That's quite obvious to all but you. And, I would be very happy to make any wager that you care to about that situation.
Why is it so obvious? Maybe he won't start, but 400 ABs aren't out of the question.

Well, you're the one that put him at 2nd base. There's several scouting reports that suggest Beckham will need to move from SS to either 2nd or 3rd. And his bat translates just fine to 3rd. He's got the power to hit 25. Corie Koskie? Really? I guess if your memory is of 2001......
Show me these scouting reports. His bat doesn't translate to 3rd nearly as well to SS or 2b. That's obvious.

Yes, Corey Koskie. I'd be very happy if Beckham's career line resembled Koskie's (.275/.367/.458). I'd just rather have that production out of the middle infield than a corner spot.

hellview
10-20-2008, 02:35 PM
Not true. Teams don't always draft on "sure thing" ability -- it is more about high(er) ceiling and position for other people. Look at the Rays -- Tim Beckham is a raw SS out of high school.

Tim Beckham was about money cause he signed for alot less then Alverez, Posey, Hosmer and Matsuz.

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 02:37 PM
Tim Beckham was about money cause he signed for alot less then Alverez, Posey, Hosmer and Matsuz.
No, the Rays do not pinch pennies on the draft and had long term guys at 1B, C, and 3B.

hellview
10-20-2008, 02:45 PM
No, the Rays do not pinch pennies on the draft and had long term guys at 1B, C, and 3B.

You never draft cause of need, you draft cause of talent. Joey Votto looks like a player, that doesn't stop you from drafting Yonder. And even though his ceiling his high IMO he isn't any better or more talented then Alverez, Posey, Hosmer and Matsuz.

btrain929
10-20-2008, 02:45 PM
No, the Rays do not pinch pennies on the draft and had long term guys at 1B, C, and 3B.

You should not draft for need. You take the best player on the board and worry about fitting them into your MLB roster later. Especially with the # of prospects that end up being busts.

champagne030
10-20-2008, 02:45 PM
Show me these scouting reports. His bat doesn't translate to 3rd nearly as well to SS or 2b. That's obvious.

Yes, Corey Koskie. I'd be very happy if Beckham's career line resembled Koskie's (.275/.367/.458). I'd just rather have that production out of the middle infield than a corner spot.

Of course 20-25 HR's looks better from a middle infield spot, but it works at 3rd.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/ask-ba/2008/267034.html

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 02:56 PM
You should not draft for need. You take the best player on the board and worry about fitting them into your MLB roster later. Especially with the # of prospects that end up being busts.
I don't really see anything wrong in their case, especially considering their position this year and in the future. They could afford to take a risk on T. Beckham and his high ceiling.

btrain929
10-20-2008, 03:11 PM
I don't really see anything wrong in their case, especially considering their position this year and in the future. They could afford to take a risk on T. Beckham and his high ceiling.

NOBODY predicted this type of a 2008 out of the Tampa Bay Rays. That is hindsight.

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 03:16 PM
NOBODY predicted this type of a 2008 out of the Tampa Bay Rays. That is hindsight.
Not necessarily. There were people who thought they'd be good -- maybe not WS champs good, but still contenders. Also, they had the draft in June, not before the season.

btrain929
10-20-2008, 03:23 PM
Not necessarily. There were people who thought they'd be good -- maybe not WS champs good, but still contenders. Also, they had the draft in June, not before the season.

I don't even know what you're arguing, though. If they were in last place in June, they would have drafted somebody different? :scratch:

All I remember is when we were drafting, I was split between drafting Beckham or Smoak. Couldn't really go wrong either way. Now that we have Beckham, if we end up having too many middle infielders down the road, that's a GOOD thing. We can use our farm or some spare pieces to trade and fill other holes we have. I don't think we should NOT sign Hudson because Beckham MIGHT be with us in 2 years MAYBE at SS or POSSIBLY at 2B. We worry about now, now, and later, later.

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 03:31 PM
I don't even know what you're arguing, though. If they were in last place in June, they would have drafted somebody different? :scratch:

All I remember is when we were drafting, I was split between drafting Beckham or Smoak. Couldn't really go wrong either way. Now that we have Beckham, if we end up having too many middle infielders down the road, that's a GOOD thing. We can use our farm or some spare pieces to trade and fill other holes we have. I don't think we should NOT sign Hudson because Beckham MIGHT be with us in 2 years MAYBE at SS or POSSIBLY at 2B. We worry about now, now, and later, later.
Perhaps if Hudson was a better, cheaper option I would agree. As I've stated before, his game has never been all that great in the AL. Also, the spacious dimensions of AZ suit his game considerably better than the tight gaps in USCF.

I wouldn't bet on Hudson posting a .775 OPS or higher in 130+ games in the AL next season.

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 03:37 PM
Of course 20-25 HR's looks better from a middle infield spot, but it works at 3rd.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/ask-ba/2008/267034.html
The report says nothing about him needing to move to 3b.

champagne030
10-20-2008, 03:48 PM
The report says nothing about him needing to move to 3b.

It was to point out that the Sox are playing him at 3rd in the AFL. And we both know you've seen reports that he may need to be moved from SS. I know I've read more than 1 report that he could end up at 3rd. I'm not going to bother looking for them, you know how to search the internet and we both know that the higher projections of his offensive numbers of 25 HR's and .280-.300 average would be fine at 3rd. And obviously even better at a MI spot.

Lip Man 1
10-20-2008, 04:14 PM
Grebeck:

You're the one who has him at 2nd base in your comments. I know that he plays short and unless the Sox can get a solid 3rd baseman, I am being told they are strongly considering moving him to 3rd base.

I don't make absolute predictions and I don't waste my time on a computer trying to predict the future. All I do is pass along what I'm being told and for what that may be worth, I'm being told Getz may in fact make the club as a utility player... the only possible way he "starts" at 2nd base is if Kenny simply can not come up with a reliable, veteran to play second base.

Kenny simply does not want an inexperienced middle infield since Ramirez will be new to shortstop at the major league level.

Again it's nothing against Getz, he seems like he has talent and could eventually make an impact, but not now...not with a team that says it will "contend" next season.

Let's wait and see how this all plays out shall we?

And I like Mark as well, he's a fierce compeditor but his injury history the past few years is even worse then Hudson and he can't do what Orlando does.

If the Sox are going to make a pitch for anyone, I hope it's Hudson...and I've been told by enough folks, that's one of their two targets. Doesn't mean it will happen, it takes two parties to say "yes..." but again that's what I'm being told. And history shows that Kenny eventually gets the players he has targeted for better or worse and he's been hot after Hudson for the past few years.

Lip

munchman33
10-20-2008, 04:18 PM
In what I'm saying it isn't like they'd be operating without a back-up plan. I'm not saying they should give Getz the job totally, I'm saying he should get the majority of the ABs with a right-handed veteran spotting him and taking over should things go awry. I'd say, for next season, 3b and CF are far more important holes to fill than 2B.


That wouldn't be the worst idea. But 3B will be harder to fill outside the organization, and it's entirely possible that a veteran/platoon situation with Josh Fields occurs. It's more likely than one with Getz, mostly because of the positions they play and the available free agents. It's actually a decent possibility Crede's back and playing part time with Fields.

Thome25
10-20-2008, 04:20 PM
Grebeck:

You're the one who has him at 2nd base in your comments. I know that he plays short and unless the Sox can get a solid 3rd baseman, I am being told they are strongly considering moving him to 3rd base.

I don't make absolute predictions and I don't waste my time on a computer trying to predict the future. All I do is pass along what I'm being told and for what that may be worth, I'm being told Getz may in fact make the club as a utility player... the only possible way he "starts" at 2nd base is if Kenny simply can not come up with a reliable, veteran to play second base.

Kenny simply does not want an inexperienced middle infield since Ramirez will be new to shortstop at the major league level.

Again it's nothing against Getz, he seems like he has talent and could eventually make an impact, but not now...not with a team that says it will "contend" next season.

Let's wait and see how this all plays out shall we?

And I like Mark as well, he's a fierce compeditor but his injury history the past few years is even worse then Hudson and he can't do what Orlando does.

If the Sox are going to make a pitch for anyone, I hope it's Hudson...and I've been told by enough folks, that's one of their two targets. Doesn't mean it will happen, it takes two parties to say "yes..." but again that's what I'm being told. And history shows that Kenny eventually gets the players he has targeted for better or worse and he's been hot after Hudson for the past few years.

Lip

Lip--If Orlando Hudson is one of our two targets at 2B then who is the other one? Could it be Robinson Cano?

btrain929
10-20-2008, 04:20 PM
Lip,

I know you are only privileged to so much information. I know you've heard Hudson is on the radar. You haven't heard figures as far as what Hudson will be looking for or what we're willing to offer him, have you? It seemed like last year, everyone knew that we were going to offer Hunter 5/75. Also, any word on possible 3B and CF options not named Figgins? Do you know if we're high on Anderson as a CF option, or would we look outside of the organization?

btrain929
10-20-2008, 04:22 PM
That wouldn't be the worst idea. But 3B will be harder to fill outside the organization, and it's entirely possible that a veteran/platoon situation with Josh Fields occurs. It's more likely than one with Getz, mostly because of the positions they play and the available free agents. It's actually a decent possibility Crede's back and playing part time with Fields.

At which point Fields will pull a Tonya Harding to ensure he gets a full season on the big league level to himself.....:D:

getonbckthr
10-20-2008, 04:23 PM
That's just ridiculous. Hudson is a better hitter, has a better eye, and is ten times the defender.
Grudz has a higher lifetime batting average, Hudson has a better fielding percentage but over the past 5 years they are very similar. Not to mention Grudz will be a ton cheaper as well.

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 04:25 PM
It was to point out that the Sox are playing him at 3rd in the AFL. And we both know you've seen reports that he may need to be moved from SS. I know I've read more than 1 report that he could end up at 3rd. I'm not going to bother looking for them, you know how to search the internet and we both know that the higher projections of his offensive numbers of 25 HR's and .280-.300 average would be fine at 3rd. And obviously even better at a MI spot.
He's playing around the infield because the Sox missed the "priority" deadline when they sent Beckham to the AFL (due to his late signing).

Grebeck:

You're the one who has him at 2nd base in your comments. I know that he plays short and unless the Sox can get a solid 3rd baseman, I am being told they are strongly considering moving him to 3rd base.

I don't make absolute predictions and I don't waste my time on a computer trying to predict the future. All I do is pass along what I'm being told and for what that may be worth, I'm being told Getz may in fact make the club as a utility player... the only possible way he "starts" at 2nd base is if Kenny simply can not come up with a reliable, veteran to play second base.

Kenny simply does not want an inexperienced middle infield since Ramirez will be new to shortstop at the major league level.

Again it's nothing against Getz, he seems like he has talent and could eventually make an impact, but not now...not with a team that says it will "contend" next season.

Let's wait and see how this all plays out shall we?

And I like Mark as well, he's a fierce compeditor but his injury history the past few years is even worse then Hudson and he can't do what Orlando does.

If the Sox are going to make a pitch for anyone, I hope it's Hudson...and I've been told by enough folks, that's one of their two targets. Doesn't mean it will happen, it takes two parties to say "yes..." but again that's what I'm being told. And history shows that Kenny eventually gets the players he has targeted for better or worse and he's been hot after Hudson for the past few years.

Lip
Hudson is injury riddled and hasn't proven much in the AL. That's the main reason to pass.

hellview
10-20-2008, 04:46 PM
Hudson is injury riddled and hasn't proven much in the AL. That's the main reason to pass.

If you've actually paid attention, Hudson's injuries have come on extremly flukey plays.

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 04:52 PM
If you've actually paid attention, Hudson's injuries have come on extremly flukey plays.
That attrition, whether or not it came from a flukey play, certainly makes him more apt to be injured in the future. He's played over 140 games twice in six seasons, and over 150 once.

btrain929
10-20-2008, 04:56 PM
That attrition, whether or not it came from a flukey play, certainly makes him more apt to be injured in the future. He's played over 140 games twice in six seasons, and over 150 once.

Way to conveniently leave out that 3 of those seasons he played 131, 135, and 139 games. It's not like he's having Mark Prior/Nomar-like injury-riddled seasons. Missing 20-25 games a year isn't that big of a red flag to me considering the other 85% of the year he's contributing to the team positively offensively, defensively, and on the basepaths.

Lip Man 1
10-20-2008, 06:03 PM
This and that:

Thome: The other name is Chone Figgins for 3rd base.

Btrain: Sorry I have not heard anything on what Hudson may be asking for.

Craig: It is rather ironic that you find fault with Hudson due to injury but are "pushing" (for want of a better word) Mark G. who is nothing but an accident waiting to happen given his history.

Lip

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 06:47 PM
Way to conveniently leave out that 3 of those seasons he played 131, 135, and 139 games. It's not like he's having Mark Prior/Nomar-like injury-riddled seasons. Missing 20-25 games a year isn't that big of a red flag to me considering the other 85% of the year he's contributing to the team positively offensively, defensively, and on the basepaths.
If we're paying him eight figures a year, he should be playing 145 at the minimum. Once again, if he wasn't playing in the weaker league in a ballpark that has highly inflated his numbers the last three seasons then I'd be willing to take that risk. He's been average away from Chase.

This and that:

Thome: The other name is Chone Figgins for 3rd base.

Btrain: Sorry I have not heard anything on what Hudson may be asking for.

Craig: It is rather ironic that you find fault with Hudson due to injury but are "pushing" (for want of a better word) Mark G. who is nothing but an accident waiting to happen given his history.

Lip
Come on. If you can't see the difference between giving Hudson something like 3/36 or 4/48 and giving Grudz a one year deal to be Getz's platoon partner, then I'm afraid there's something wrong with you.

champagne030
10-20-2008, 07:44 PM
He's playing around the infield because the Sox missed the "priority" deadline when they sent Beckham to the AFL (due to his late signing).




Directly from the White Sox.....

"We feel confident he can play shortstop," said White Sox director of amateur scouting Doug Laumann of the team's top selection. "If it's not shortstop, then he can move in either direction to second or third.http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080605&content_id=2845761&vkey=draft2008&fext=.jsp

Craig Grebeck
10-20-2008, 09:24 PM
Directly from the White Sox.....

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20080605&content_id=2845761&vkey=draft2008&fext=.jsp
I was talking directly about his playing time and position in the AFL.

I don't see how it isn't obvious that 2B would be a much better fit for Beckham than 3B. His bat is just flat out better there.

LoveYourSuit
10-20-2008, 11:23 PM
Swisher for Brian Roberts.....let's close this thread.

1. Get a dynamic Lead off hitter in here who plays 2B
2. No more bad Swisher commericals .... and he's bad at baseball too.

Domeshot17
10-21-2008, 09:01 AM
I would rather try and sign Furcal and keep Alexei at 2b. Furcal gives us what we need in the middle IF, a lead off hitter who can steal bases hit .300 and thrown a ton of leather. Hudson gives a guy who can play a solid 2b, hit maybe .300, but only has 1st to 3rd speed, nothing that translates to stolen bases (I think he has like 8 career SB or something really low). If we get him, we still need to find a real leadoff hitter.

In my perfect world, we could sign furcal, trade for roberts, slide Alexei to 3rd and have a fantastic IF. I know it won't happen, so Furcal and Roberts have to be 1 and 1a on my list before I hope for Hudson

btrain929
10-21-2008, 09:05 AM
I would rather try and sign Furcal and keep Alexei at 2b. Furcal gives us what we need in the middle IF, a lead off hitter who can steal bases hit .300 and thrown a ton of leather. Hudson gives a guy who can play a solid 2b, hit maybe .300, but only has 1st to 3rd speed, nothing that translates to stolen bases (I think he has like 8 career SB or something really low). If we get him, we still need to find a real leadoff hitter.

In my perfect world, we could sign furcal, trade for roberts, slide Alexei to 3rd and have a fantastic IF. I know it won't happen, so Furcal and Roberts have to be 1 and 1a on my list before I hope for Hudson

If we could sign Furcal for SS and trade for Dejesus to play CF and bat #2, I would be a happy camper. Now the reality of all that happening isn't very promising.

Another unlikely scenario is if we go nuts in the FA market and sign Furcal for SS and Hudson for 2B (bat 1st and 2nd in the lineup) and plug Alexei in CF. Doubtful, but would definitely be intriguing.

Domeshot17
10-21-2008, 09:14 AM
If we could sign Furcal for SS and trade for Dejesus to play CF and bat #2, I would be a happy camper. Now the reality of all that happening isn't very promising.

Another unlikely scenario is if we go nuts in the FA market and sign Furcal for SS and Hudson for 2B (bat 1st and 2nd in the lineup) and plug Alexei in CF. Doubtful, but would definitely be intriguing.

There should be a little bit of money to spend, we have close to 20 mil coming off the books in Cabrera-Crede-Uribe etc.

btrain929
10-21-2008, 09:18 AM
There should be a little bit of money to spend, we have close to 20 mil coming off the books in Cabrera-Crede-Uribe etc.

Yeah, I think it was 8.5 for Cabrera, 5 for Crede, and 4.5 for Uribe = 18 million. The only money I see going up is Jenks since he's arbitration eligible for the first time. His salary might shoot from 700-800K to 4-6 million. Plus I still have a feeling we're going to trade Dye so we can have Quentin and Swisher in the corners. I doubt we're going to acquire a guy who makes more then Dye, so that would cut salary as well.

khan
10-21-2008, 10:54 AM
Yeah, I think it was 8.5 for Cabrera, 5 for Crede, and 4.5 for Uribe = 18 million. The only money I see going up is Jenks since he's arbitration eligible for the first time. His salary might shoot from 700-800K to 4-6 million. Plus I still have a feeling we're going to trade Dye so we can have Quentin and Swisher in the corners. I doubt we're going to acquire a guy who makes more then Dye, so that would cut salary as well.

How much of Griffey's buyout will have to come from the SOX, and how much from Cincinnati? Wouldn't that then reduce the amount of savings?

The other thing to consider are the built-in raises to players already in the roster, as well...

btrain929
10-21-2008, 10:58 AM
How much of Griffey's buyout will have to come from the SOX, and how much from Cincinnati? Wouldn't that then reduce the amount of savings?

The other thing to consider are the built-in raises to players already in the roster, as well...

I'm not 100% on this, but I'm pretty sure the Sox and Reds are splitting Griffey's 4 mil buyout, so the Sox are on the hook for 2 mil. So that would bring the grand total of saved money to 16 mil. Then, like you said, there will be raises to some players contracts, and arbitration to Jenks. Maybe after it's all said and done we'll have 10 mil to play with, along with any salary we tack on to that if the right player comes along.

khan
10-21-2008, 11:04 AM
And again, this is also assuming that Uribe isn't here next year, the chances of which I'd put at ~50/50 right now. Who knows, maybe Uribe will be back, AND [GULP] at a higher contract than this year's deal.

I think when its all said and done, any potential salary savings will be much less than what was initially cited. That is, BEFORE KW goes shopping on the FA market.

I'd also think that we'll all have to hope that The Chairman sees the 2008 AL Central Champs as having potential in'09, and is willing to spend more as a result.

kittle42
10-21-2008, 11:06 AM
I'd also think that we'll all have to hope that The Chairman sees the 2008 AL Central Champs as having potential in'09, and is willing to spend more as a result.

I wouldn't count on it. 50 cents and a dollar and whatnot. I'm just waiting for the day Williams says something that allows me to resurrect that signature.

btrain929
10-21-2008, 11:15 AM
And again, this is also assuming that Uribe isn't here next year, the chances of which I'd put at ~50/50 right now. Who knows, maybe Uribe will be back, AND [GULP] at a higher contract than this year's deal.

I think when its all said and done, any potential salary savings will be much less than what was initially cited. That is, BEFORE KW goes shopping on the FA market.

I'd also think that we'll all have to hope that The Chairman sees the 2008 AL Central Champs as having potential in'09, and is willing to spend more as a result.

As exciting as this offseason will be, I can't wait for the offseason after the '09 baseball season. And please don't reply with your "can we get through this offseason first?" After '09, we have Thome, Contreras, Dotel, Macdougal, and possibly Dye (if his mutual option isn't picked up or he's traded by then) coming off the books. Our team will look drastically different by the time spring training of 2010 comes.

Thome25
10-21-2008, 11:33 AM
There may or may not be money to spend on a 2B/SS. Thome's salary is actually going UP in 2009. Whereas the Phillies were paying half of it the last three years, I believe the Sox may be on the hook for ALL of Thome's salary in 2009. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

whitesox901
10-21-2008, 11:39 AM
Grebeck:
Kenny simply does not want an inexperienced middle infield since Ramirez will be new to shortstop at the major league level.

Again it's nothing against Getz, he seems like he has talent and could eventually make an impact, but not now...not with a team that says it will "contend" next season.

Let's wait and see how this all plays out shall we?

And I like Mark as well, he's a fierce compeditor but his injury history the past few years is even worse then Hudson and he can't do what Orlando does.

If the Sox are going to make a pitch for anyone, I hope it's Hudson...and I've been told by enough folks, that's one of their two targets. Doesn't mean it will happen, it takes two parties to say "yes..." but again that's what I'm being told. And history shows that Kenny eventually gets the players he has targeted for better or worse and he's been hot after Hudson for the past few years.

Lip

I hope your right Lip, Hudson would be ideal with the young Ramirez at short. Wonder whom that other target is though.

eriqjaffe
10-21-2008, 11:41 AM
There may or may not be money to spend on a 2B/SS. Thome's salary is actually going UP in 2009. Whereas the Phillies were paying half of it the last three years, I believe the Sox may be on the hook for ALL of Thome's salary in 2009. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.The Phils paid $22m of the $41m on the contract, so the Sox are essentially on the hook for $6m this year.

LoveYourSuit
10-21-2008, 11:43 AM
There may or may not be money to spend on a 2B/SS. Thome's salary is actually going UP in 2009. Whereas the Phillies were paying half of it the last three years, I believe the Sox may be on the hook for ALL of Thome's salary in 2009. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.


You are correct on that but I think his salary is coming down from $16 million to $13 million. Per the agreement, the Sox are on the hook for it 100%.

Would be nice if Thome goes to the Sox and asks to rip the deal for a 2 year $18 million contract so the Sox pay him $9 per year and he is allowed to finish his career here and hit #600 in a Sox uniform.

But now I don't know if I want 2 more years of Thome, but for marketing the 600th HR, it might make sense.

LoveYourSuit
10-21-2008, 11:45 AM
The Phils paid $22m of the $41m on the contract, so the Sox are essentially on the hook for $6m this year.


I thought that did not include the 2009 player option?

The Sox have had him for 3 season now paying about $14 million per year. That's $42 million right there for them to split with the Phils.

champagne030
10-21-2008, 11:58 AM
I thought that did not include the 2009 player option?

The Sox have had him for 3 season now paying about $14 million per year. That's $42 million right there for them to split with the Phils.

Depends on what source you want to use. I've seen reports that the Phillies are paying us anywhere from $3-5.5M of his $13M for 2009.

Gammons Peter
10-21-2008, 12:11 PM
Told by who? Sorry but I don't remember what connections you have.


....

Lip Man 1
10-21-2008, 02:34 PM
Sox 901:

Chone Figgins

Lip

oeo
10-21-2008, 02:36 PM
Sox 901:

Chone Figgins

Lip

Who's that?

munchman33
10-21-2008, 02:40 PM
Sox 901:

Chone Figgins

Lip

I wouldn't rule out David Eckstein. He can lead off, is grindy, can be signed short term, and would be cheap.

khan
10-21-2008, 02:58 PM
I wouldn't count on it. 50 cents and a dollar and whatnot. I'm just waiting for the day Williams says something that allows me to resurrect that signature.

Nor am I counting on it. But it is my fervent hope that it is the case that The Chairman does continue to spend a little bit...

[Wow! My 100th post is about The Chairman's spending!]

johnnyg83
10-21-2008, 03:00 PM
I'd prefer Hudson, but would not mind Eckstein at 2b and leadoff as a stopgap. Decent OBP, glove, 2b arm and some modest speed.

khan
10-21-2008, 03:01 PM
As exciting as this offseason will be, I can't wait for the offseason after the '09 baseball season.

After '09, we have Thome, Contreras, Dotel, Macdougal, and possibly Dye (if his mutual option isn't picked up or he's traded by then) coming off the books. Our team will look drastically different by the time spring training of 2010 comes.

I'm thinking that Dye is gone THIS offseason, as he's the one piece of value that is moveable in this team. MacDougal's contract makes his sucktitude hurt all the more, though I'd guess that he'll be gone before the '09 season.

Thome, Dotel, and Contreras aren't going anywhere until after '09, though...

Gammons Peter
10-21-2008, 03:17 PM
Grebeck:

You're the one who has him at 2nd base in your comments. I know that he plays short and unless the Sox can get a solid 3rd baseman, I am being told they are strongly considering moving him to 3rd base.

I don't make absolute predictions and I don't waste my time on a computer trying to predict the future. All I do is pass along what I'm being told and for what that may be worth, I'm being told Getz may in fact make the club as a utility player... the only possible way he "starts" at 2nd base is if Kenny simply can not come up with a reliable, veteran to play second base.

Kenny simply does not want an inexperienced middle infield since Ramirez will be new to shortstop at the major league level.

Again it's nothing against Getz, he seems like he has talent and could eventually make an impact, but not now...not with a team that says it will "contend" next season.

Let's wait and see how this all plays out shall we?

And I like Mark as well, he's a fierce compeditor but his injury history the past few years is even worse then Hudson and he can't do what Orlando does.

If the Sox are going to make a pitch for anyone, I hope it's Hudson...and I've been told by enough folks, that's one of their two targets. Doesn't mean it will happen, it takes two parties to say "yes..." but again that's what I'm being told. And history shows that Kenny eventually gets the players he has targeted for better or worse and he's been hot after Hudson for the past few years.

Lip

Told by who? Sorry but I don't remember what connections you have.

I did ask nicely

btrain929
10-21-2008, 03:27 PM
I did ask nicely

He's said numerous times that he has connections with people high in the organization or something to that sort. Do you want social security numbers and addresses? Bottom line is he isn't just pulling this stuff out of his ass.....

Gammons Peter
10-21-2008, 03:31 PM
He's said numerous times that he has connections with people high in the organization or something to that sort. Do you want social security numbers and addresses? Bottom line is he isn't just pulling this stuff out of his ass.....


Relax, I never said he was making anything up, I don't believe I have seen a post of his that addressed the issue of his sources before. No, I don't want social security numbers, you don't have to act like a stroke.

btrain929
10-21-2008, 03:32 PM
Relax, I never said he was making anything up, I don't believe I have seen a post of his that addressed the issue of his sources before. No, I don't want social security numbers, you don't have to act like a stroke.

Well when you ask who his source is 3, 4, 5 times in the same thread it gets annoying. Have patience young catepillar, he'll get to you and your questions.

Gammons Peter
10-21-2008, 03:33 PM
Well when you ask who his source is 3, 4, 5 times in the same thread it gets annoying. Have patience young catepillar, he'll get to you and your questions.


I asked three times because I was ignored the first two times.

btrain929
10-21-2008, 03:36 PM
I asked three times because I was ignored the first two times.

:whiner::whiner:

Gammons Peter
10-21-2008, 03:39 PM
It's okay, don't cry, I forgive you

Craig Grebeck
10-21-2008, 04:06 PM
Eckstein had serious troubles with righties last season. Him and Getz wouldn't be an awful platoon, though I prefer Grudz.

AZChiSoxFan
10-21-2008, 04:23 PM
I'm sorry but if the Sox have Eckstein on the roster next year, I'll puke on opening day.

Heck, why not just acquire R Alomar again?

whitesox901
10-21-2008, 05:00 PM
Sox 901:

Chone Figgins

Lip


Thanks Lip!

johnnyg83
10-21-2008, 05:28 PM
I'm sorry but if the Sox have Eckstein on the roster next year, I'll puke on opening day.

Heck, why not just acquire R Alomar again?

slightly different ... slightly as robbie's been retired for years. And Eckstein hit .309 and had a obp of .356 in 2007.

How about Josh Bard as the backup C, I think SD just released him. Historically good bat and eye ... not much defense.

Lip Man 1
10-21-2008, 06:51 PM
Gammons:

Sources in the organization and sources in the Chicago media.

That's as specific as I'll get.

Lip

WhiteSox5187
10-21-2008, 08:11 PM
I'd prefer Hudson, but would not mind Eckstein at 2b and leadoff as a stopgap. Decent OBP, glove, 2b arm and some modest speed.
He only played 94 games this season and only had two stolen bases (though that's not a good indicator of speed). He's at the end of his rope and can not be counted on to be any sort of stop gap measure.

johnnyg83
10-21-2008, 11:10 PM
He only played 94 games this season and only had two stolen bases (though that's not a good indicator of speed). He's at the end of his rope and can not be counted on to be any sort of stop gap measure.

He's never been a base stealer though. He did not have a good 2008 I admit, though his OBP was still decent, but he's one year away from .307 ... to call his career over (as I've interpreted your "end of the rope" comment) might be a bit of crystal ball analysis ... and he can play SS and pinch run.

The Getz/Eckstein lefty righty thing is interesting.

BleacherBandit
10-21-2008, 11:59 PM
He only played 94 games this season and only had two stolen bases (though that's not a good indicator of speed). He's at the end of his rope and can not be counted on to be any sort of stop gap measure.

He's appearantly only 33. Even with his injuries, that isn't old at all. He possibly has about 5 more years in which he could really help a team.

drewcifer
10-22-2008, 12:10 AM
He's appearantly only 33. Even with his injuries, that isn't old at all. He possibly has about 5 more years in which he could really help a team.

You think? How much would you be willing to pay him "to help"?

WhiteSox5187
10-22-2008, 01:05 AM
He's never been a base stealer though. He did not have a good 2008 I admit, though his OBP was still decent, but he's one year away from .307 ... to call his career over (as I've interpreted your "end of the rope" comment) might be a bit of crystal ball analysis ... and he can play SS and pinch run.

The Getz/Eckstein lefty righty thing is interesting.
He stole thirty his first year with the Angels, but that was a long time ago.

His OBP was good, but personally I'd want a bit more of a stolen base threat if he's going to be my lead off guy. I don't think he'd want to be a platoon player yet. While techincally he can play SS, the fact that he has to wind up to throw the ball unnerves me. I love Eckstein (as he is EXACTLY my height, so he gives me hope!) but I think he's squeezed every last bit of energy from that body and it's breaking down on him. Part of it depends on whether or not we get Figgins, if we get him I wouldn't mind seeing a Getz/Eckstein platoon (assuming Eckstein comes at the right price). But I don't want to go into '09 with Eckstein being our primary leadoff hitter.

WhiteSox5187
10-22-2008, 01:06 AM
You think? How much would you be willing to pay him "to help"?
He made 4.5 million in '07, which is about what we paid Uribe this year...however, I wouldn't pay him much past three million.

Craig Grebeck
10-22-2008, 07:10 AM
Eckstein can not play SS. Out of the question.

Gammons Peter
10-22-2008, 08:03 AM
thanks Lip.

Thome25
10-22-2008, 09:26 AM
Eckstein can not play SS. Out of the question.


Eckstein would play 2B if the Sox acquired him with Alexei moving over to short.

Personally I don't want Eckstein or Grudz. I'd like the White Sox to get Chone Figgins for 3B and Hudson OR Robinson Cano for 2B.

If Hudson or Cano are out of the question then Mark Ellis would be my plan B at 2B.

Craig Grebeck
10-22-2008, 09:32 AM
Eckstein would play 2B if the Sox acquired him with Alexei moving over to short.

Personally I don't want Eckstein or Grudz. I'd like the White Sox to get Chone Figgins for 3B and Hudson OR Robinson Cano for 2B.

If Hudson or Cano are out of the question then Mark Ellis would be my plan B at 2B.
Ellis was resigned by the Athletics earlier this week.

Edit: And on Eckstein: I was referring to an earlier post saying he could spend time at SS as well. He barely has the arm for 2B.

Lukin13
10-22-2008, 10:07 AM
Hudson: 10/1

Figgins: 50/1

johnnyg83
10-22-2008, 12:49 PM
Eckstein can not play SS. Out of the question.

I don't mean as a starter. I mean as a Norberto Martin, Pablo Ozuna in a jam type SS.

munchman33
10-22-2008, 04:39 PM
In theory, the Eckstein/Getz platoon makes the most sense. It makes sense with money, with development, and with production. The problem is there aren't many available free agent options in CF for leadoff. And Ozzie wouldn't be thrilled about Getz leading off, meaning that platoon becomes more of a full time gig for Eckstein.

Really, the most ideal situation is to trade for Brian Roberts and stop thinking about platooning second base. I realize why a lot of people hate Roberts and why others want Getz to have a job, but there's not a lot of options for leadoff. In the end, we all want what's best for the White Sox, not individuals and not ourselves. Roberts represents the most solid solution to two of our biggest issues.

kittle42
10-22-2008, 05:04 PM
Really, the most ideal situation is to trade for Brian Roberts and stop thinking about platooning second base. I realize why a lot of people hate Roberts and why others want Getz to have a job, but there's not a lot of options for leadoff. In the end, we all want what's best for the White Sox, not individuals and not ourselves. Roberts represents the most solid solution to two of our biggest issues.

If they could pry him away from Baltimore without giving up the king's ransom the O's wanted last season, I'd be all for it.

btrain929
10-22-2008, 05:12 PM
The only problem with the Figgins and Roberts scenarios is, if they want to test free agency after '09, then we're stuck again with no leadoff hitter after giving up a good amount to get them. That's the only reason why I'd be somewhat interested in getting Pierre. Have the Dodgers give us Pierre and 13.5 million (making his contract 3yr/15mil or 5mil/year) and we'll give them whatever spare parts they want. He has speed, can leadoff, will make contact, and will cover alot of ground in the OF to help Dye/Swisher/Quentin. I'm willing to take his girly arm and less than .350 OBP if he can do the above. The Dodgers won't be looking for a king's ransom since they'll just be happy to be getting rid of him. If it works out, we have an effective leadoff hitter for the next 3 years.

Craig Grebeck
10-22-2008, 08:15 PM
The only problem with the Figgins and Roberts scenarios is, if they want to test free agency after '09, then we're stuck again with no leadoff hitter after giving up a good amount to get them. That's the only reason why I'd be somewhat interested in getting Pierre. Have the Dodgers give us Pierre and 13.5 million (making his contract 3yr/15mil or 5mil/year) and we'll give them whatever spare parts they want. He has speed, can leadoff, will make contact, and will cover alot of ground in the OF to help Dye/Swisher/Quentin. I'm willing to take his girly arm and less than .350 OBP if he can do the above. The Dodgers won't be looking for a king's ransom since they'll just be happy to be getting rid of him. If it works out, we have an effective leadoff hitter for the next 3 years.
Effective in what capacity? There's no guarantee he's effective for one season, let alone three.

WhiteSox5187
10-22-2008, 09:41 PM
If they could pry him away from Baltimore without giving up the king's ransom the O's wanted last season, I'd be all for it.
Well he is a free agent at the end of '09, so they'll probably be a bit more willing to trade him as I highly doubt he comes back to Baltimore. But again, I don't think we have the pieces. Unless they're willing to consider Fields as their main acquisition in this trade, I don't think we can land Roberts. We'll see, but getting him would be great.

4 points
10-25-2008, 03:16 AM
1. Beckham's a SS. The fact that you don't even know what position he currently plays tells me I shouldn't trust your opinion that he'll move to 3B. Why won't he move to 3rd? Because he's fine in the middle IF and his bat doesn't translate as well at 3rd base. If he stays in the infield he's a positive offensively, if he moves to 3rd, he compares to a poor man's Corey Koskie.

2. There's no reason to believe it won't be Getz. The 2b market is average at best and signing a caddy like Grudz or sticking with Uribe wouldn't kill us.

Sweet. Tear down pretty basic statistics. I don't know that Getz will be good-great, I just am pretty sure I don't want to throw money at Hudson or trade for a 2b when there's an adequate LH 2b sitting in the organization.

Lip, if Getz is two years away from starting, what do you call his performance in AAA this year?

1) Beckham does not have the range to be an everyday starting SS, stopgap maybe, but not everyday.
2) I like your enthusiasm, but if Getz sees 400+ at bats, were in trouble.
3) If Beckham ends up having a C. Koskie type career, we blew the pick.:gulp:

Konerko05
10-25-2008, 03:41 AM
1) Beckham does not have the range to be an everyday starting SS, stopgap maybe, but not everyday.
2) I like your enthusiasm, but if Getz sees 400+ at bats, were in trouble.
3) If Beckham ends up having a C. Koskie type career, we blew the pick.:gulp:

That was only 3 points.

4 points
10-25-2008, 04:15 AM
That was only 3 points.

:tongue::bandance::tongue::dtroll::gulp: LOL.

Craig Grebeck
10-25-2008, 07:55 AM
1) Beckham does not have the range to be an everyday starting SS, stopgap maybe, but not everyday.
2) I like your enthusiasm, but if Getz sees 400+ at bats, were in trouble.
3) If Beckham ends up having a C. Koskie type career, we blew the pick.:gulp:
I'll trust the numerous scouts that say otherwise. If Beckham puts up Koskie's career line in the middle infield, then we did not blow the pick. Koskie was solid for a while.

guillensdisciple
10-25-2008, 02:07 PM
Well he is a free agent at the end of '09, so they'll probably be a bit more willing to trade him as I highly doubt he comes back to Baltimore. But again, I don't think we have the pieces. Unless they're willing to consider Fields as their main acquisition in this trade, I don't think we can land Roberts. We'll see, but getting him would be great.

Why not? I don't understand why it would be so difficult to get him. YES, he is great, but Baltimore has been shopping him for a while and with his free agency coming up, they will want to cash in any way possible. They won't settle for nothing, but I believe the Sox do have the pieces to get him.