PDA

View Full Version : Brewers & Sox are in hot talks about Jenks


Rockabilly
12-05-2008, 02:39 PM
Paul White of USA Today was on XM radio and he mentioned that the Sox and Brewers are in some heavy talks about Jenks...

With our IF set who would the Sox be asking for from the Brewers

CashMan
12-05-2008, 02:41 PM
Paul White of USA Today was on XM radio and he mentioned that the Sox and Brewers are in some heavy talks about Jenks...

With our IF set who would the Sox be asking for from the Brewers


A 400lb 1st basebman?

SoxFan88
12-05-2008, 02:42 PM
Cameron?

Foulke You
12-05-2008, 02:43 PM
I've heard that the Brewers are willing to part with SS JJ Hardy in a deal this offseason. Hardy is a good player with a lot of pop in his bat but I don't know if he fits our needs exactly since he is more of a power hitter. Not sure exactly what the Brewers have unless they would send us more young minor leaguers?

chisoxmike
12-05-2008, 02:44 PM
Cameron?

http://www.anaitgames.com/wp-content/darth_vader_nooo1.jpeg

SoxFan88
12-05-2008, 02:44 PM
http://www.anaitgames.com/wp-content/darth_vader_nooo1.jpeg


agreed... just throwing a name out there

spawn
12-05-2008, 02:44 PM
http://www.anaitgames.com/wp-content/darth_vader_nooo1.jpeg
:rolling:

Rockabilly
12-05-2008, 02:45 PM
maybe its for Hart. Since Dye is on the trade market

ChiSoxFan81
12-05-2008, 02:47 PM
Gangne and Bernie Brewer

soxfan43
12-05-2008, 02:47 PM
Paul White of USA Today was on XM radio and he mentioned that the Sox and Brewers are in some heavy talks about Jenks...

With our IF set who would the Sox be asking for from the Brewers


I'd hardly say the IF is set. Other than PK and the missle, it's all question marks.

LoveYourSuit
12-05-2008, 02:47 PM
Sox have to know something about Jenks other teams don't.

Rockabilly
12-05-2008, 02:48 PM
Has anyone heard any rumors about this that live in IL or WI

Foulke You
12-05-2008, 02:49 PM
maybe its for Hart. Since Dye is on the trade market
KW did say in the Sun Times today that he is turning his attention to the outfield next. Not sure if the Brewers would part with Hart though.

VenturaFan23
12-05-2008, 02:50 PM
http://www.anaitgames.com/wp-content/darth_vader_nooo1.jpeg

:rolling:

I'll take it one further.....:rolling::rolling:

Rockabilly
12-05-2008, 02:52 PM
Sox have to know something about Jenks other teams don't.


I have read reports that the Mets were a little scared about Jenks because of his strikeouts being down...

soxfan43
12-05-2008, 02:53 PM
Lets say this does go down. Who closes? Internal guy or would Kenny go after someone new?

spawn
12-05-2008, 02:54 PM
I've heard that the Brewers are willing to part with SS JJ Hardy in a deal this offseason. Hardy is a good player with a lot of pop in his bat but I don't know if he fits our needs exactly since he is more of a power hitter. Not sure exactly what the Brewers have unless they would send us more young minor leaguers?
That wouldn't make any sense. KW seems pretty set at moving Alexei to SS. I'm hoping KW isn't trying to turn into the MLB version of John Paxson, by collecting middle infielders the way Paxson collects guards.

wsgdf
12-05-2008, 02:55 PM
Rickie Weeks?

Rockabilly
12-05-2008, 02:55 PM
Lets say this does go down. Who closes? Internal guy or would Kenny go after someone new?


maybe Link will be our new closer

nodiggity59
12-05-2008, 02:56 PM
I would trade Dye and Jenks for Hart and a BP arm in a New York minute. I love Hart's youth, power, speed. Not a disciplined hitter though

The salary freed would allow us to bring in a closer and/or SP.

Rockabilly
12-05-2008, 02:57 PM
I would love to get Gallardo from Milw but that won't happen

Thome25
12-05-2008, 02:57 PM
That wouldn't make any sense. KW seems pretty set at moving Alexei to SS. I'm hoping KW isn't trying to turn into the MLB version of John Paxson, by collecting middle infielders the way Paxson collects guards.

:rolling:.....Seriously though KW knows when it's time to get rid of a pitcher. If he's shopping Jenks then something is definitely up. Wasn't his velocity and strikouts down?

SoxFan88
12-05-2008, 02:58 PM
I know everyone would rather have players that can help in 09 but what about some of their prospects.... Angel Salome? Michael Brantley? maybe someone who knows their farm better can throw out better names

Rockabilly
12-05-2008, 03:00 PM
is Paul White usually right about rumors.. I don't read him much anymore...

Goodman6
12-05-2008, 03:00 PM
Lets say this does go down. Who closes? Internal guy or would Kenny go after someone new?


Kerry Wood

103 screwball
12-05-2008, 03:01 PM
Jenks for whatever the 3rd team wants for a good leadoff hitter would be nice.

Thome25
12-05-2008, 03:01 PM
With KW saying in the suntimes that the current roster is at our payroll limit, maybe Jenks' arbitration numbers are just too high for the Sox to afford? :scratch:

oeo
12-05-2008, 03:07 PM
I would trade Dye and Jenks for Hart and a BP arm in a New York minute.

I wouldn't.

CashMan
12-05-2008, 03:07 PM
With KW saying in the suntimes that the current roster is at our payroll limit, maybe Jenks' arbitration numbers are just too high for the Sox to afford? :scratch:


Or, Kenny know something about Jenks. He has been spot on with getting rid of pitchers at the right time.

btrain929
12-05-2008, 03:08 PM
Corey Hart is 1 of my favorite non-Sox baseball players. Hart is 27 with a good combination of power and speed, but his 2nd half dropoff is pretty alarming, leaving his season stats at .268/.300/.459. This would only make sense if he returned to his 2007 form, but that's no guarantee.

I believe he's arbitration eligible this year for the first time, just like Jenks. So that might be an even swap of money, but then we'd save a ton once Dye is traded. Unless KW wants to continue with Daver's theory and put Hart in CF....

CWSpalehoseCWS
12-05-2008, 03:08 PM
With KW saying in the suntimes that the current roster is at our payroll limit, maybe Jenks' arbitration numbers are just too high for the Sox to afford? :scratch:

I think that would be pretty rediculous considering some of the other guys on the team that make way more than he does and are more expendible than Jenks.

soxfan43
12-05-2008, 03:08 PM
Or, Kenny know something about Jenks. He has been spot on with getting rid of pitchers at the right time.


Probably a combo of that and the arb number. Didn't Jenks have serious arm trouble when with the Angels org? I know that was year ago, but who knows, maybe Coop saw something. I can't wait for the winter meetings next week.

Tekijawa
12-05-2008, 03:09 PM
With KW saying in the suntimes that the current roster is at our payroll limit, maybe Jenks' arbitration numbers are just too high for the Sox to afford? :scratch:

We've erased quite a bit of salary from our books... I guess they are cutting back in this economy too?

btrain929
12-05-2008, 03:10 PM
I would trade Dye and Jenks for Hart and a BP arm in a New York minute.

That would be ridiculously overpaying for Hart. He's coming off of a .268/.300 season. Jenks would be plenty. If we liked one of their bullpen arms, we can throw them a minor leaguer to have them add the BP guy.

Tekijawa
12-05-2008, 03:11 PM
Braun plays the ourfield right? I'd take him off their hands... they can have Jenks, Dye and any minor leaguer but Beckham.

oeo
12-05-2008, 03:12 PM
That would be ridiculously overpaying for Hart. He's coming off of a .268/.300 season. Jenks would be plenty. If we liked one of their bullpen arms, we can throw them a minor leaguer to have them add the BP guy.

I still wouldn't trade Jenks straight up for Hart. He had a good year in 2007, but otherwise he's been quite unimpressive.

Braun plays the ourfield right? I'd take him off their hands... they can have Jenks, Dye and any minor leaguer but Beckham.

Braun is going nowhere.

Rockabilly
12-05-2008, 03:13 PM
the deal is probably for 2-3 prospects coming back to the Sox..

btrain929
12-05-2008, 03:14 PM
I still wouldn't trade Jenks straight up for Hart. He had a good year in 2007, but otherwise he's been quite unimpressive.

Yeah, it's close, I don't know if I would do it straight up either. I just have a man crush on him, and would love/prefer if we could get Hart w/o giving up Jenks.

CWSpalehoseCWS
12-05-2008, 03:16 PM
the deal is probably for 2-3 prospects coming back to the Sox..

I'd be pissed if we got prospects for Jenks. Jenks is one of more valuable players on the team. If we are gonna trade him, we should get someone back with the same impact he has.

btrain929
12-05-2008, 03:19 PM
the deal is probably for 2-3 prospects coming back to the Sox..

Hopefully we'd get significant '09 help, but if he does trade for prospects, Cole Gillespie would be a nice piece for the package.

FarmerAndy
12-05-2008, 03:19 PM
I'm not shocked at all about the shopping of Jenks.

The Hoffmans and Riveras of the world are few and far between. In general, closers have a relatively short shelf life. We've had a few good seasons out of Bobby now, and his stock is high.

Sure, it's possible that Jenks might go on and pitch well for years to come. But the thought proccess of shopping a guy like him now is more common baseball sense than it is a "the Sox must know something" maneuver.

But yeah, if he's gonna go, I hope to see some good return.

Rockabilly
12-05-2008, 03:20 PM
If he does, Cole Gillespie would be a nice part of the package.


that would be a great pick up for the Sox...

JohnTucker0814
12-05-2008, 03:20 PM
Mat Gamel anyone???

SoxFan88
12-05-2008, 03:20 PM
I'd be pissed if we got prospects for Jenks. Jenks is one of more valuable players on the team. If we are gonna trade him, we should get someone back with the same impact he has.


Who says they won't? It may not come till 2010 or the year after but Id rather wait a year or two for a couple really good players than one solid player next year

Konerko05
12-05-2008, 03:21 PM
Corey Hart was pretty bad last year. A RF with an OPS of .759. His average and walks were down, and his strikeouts were up from 2007.

KW probably wants Weeks.. another middle infielder with speed. I'm not sure if that's supposed to be in teal.

Weeks actually would be a good offensive player if he could hit above .235.

Tekijawa
12-05-2008, 03:22 PM
Braun is going nowhere.

Except her for Jenks!

btrain929
12-05-2008, 03:23 PM
Corey Hart was pretty bad last year. A RF with an OPS of .759. His average and walks were down, and his strikeouts were up from 2007.

KW probably wants Weeks.. another middle infielder with speed. I'm not sure if that's supposed to be in teal.

Weeks actually would be a good offensive player if he could hit above .235.

KW already said he's turning his attentions to the OF. I highly doubt we see anymore moves regarding the IF, unless PK is traded.

hi im skot
12-05-2008, 03:26 PM
Weeks actually would be a good offensive player if he could hit above .235.

...and didn't get a hangnail that keeps him out for three months.

IrishSox25
12-05-2008, 03:28 PM
Braun?

Pasqua's Mailman
12-05-2008, 03:29 PM
With KW saying in the suntimes that the current roster is at our payroll limit, maybe Jenks' arbitration numbers are just too high for the Sox to afford? :scratch:

I think this may be a bit of a misreading of what he was actually saying. This is the quote from today's Sun-Times:

While Williams admitted the current roster was "bumping up against our payroll limit," he said moving Vazquez and the two years and $23 million left on his deal was done to help the "transition into a new core" rather than a salary dump.

I read that as saying that BEFORE the trades the roster was bumping (at $100 million or so) up against their budget limit... not after the trades. That's a big distinction.

spawn
12-05-2008, 03:30 PM
Braun?


Braun is going nowhere.

What he said.

Konerko05
12-05-2008, 03:31 PM
KW already said he's turning his attentions to the OF. I highly doubt we see anymore moves regarding the IF, unless PK is traded.

Yeah I know. I know said it half jokingly because of the surplus of infielers Williams seems to be targeting this offseason. If there was a half teal color, I would have used it.

The reason it would only be half is because Weeks is very close to fitting the mold of a leadoff hitter. I'm not advocating the idea, but it's still a possibility.

Second base is not set in stone. Weeks also has a career .352 OBP with an .85% SB success rate.

I just wouldn't want a leadoff who can't hit above .235.

palehozenychicty
12-05-2008, 03:31 PM
I think he's just looking at his value on the market before they go to arbitration and nothing more. It wouldn't make any sense for them to trade him, unless you get an All-Star player.

Thome25
12-05-2008, 03:33 PM
I think this may be a bit of a misreading of what he was actually saying. This is the quote from today's Sun-Times:

While Williams admitted the current roster was "bumping up against our payroll limit," he said moving Vazquez and the two years and $23 million left on his deal was done to help the "transition into a new core" rather than a salary dump.

I read that as saying that BEFORE the trades the roster was bumping (at $100 million or so) up against their budget limit... not after the trades. That's a big distinction.

You're not the first one to intepret it this way. Maybe I'm misreading it. But, IMHO it says the CURRENT roster is "bumping up against our payroll limit". "Current" to me means the roster as it is RIGHT NOW with Uribe, Crede, Cabrera, Swisher, and Vazquez gone. To me, if the quote was referring to the 2008 roster BEFORE the trades it would've said something like: "the 2008 roster was bumping up against our payroll limit."

veeter
12-05-2008, 03:33 PM
I think he's just looking at his value on the market before they go to arbitration and nothing more. It wouldn't make any sense for them to trade him, unless you get an All-Star player.I agree. And why this close to the meetings? Wouldn't you wait a few days when every team is right there? Unless Milwaukee blows him away.

cws05champ
12-05-2008, 03:35 PM
I have read reports that the Mets were a little scared about Jenks because of his strikeouts being down...
I keep seeing and hearing this statement but anyone that has watched him pitch will see that he choses not to throw high 90's anymore. He has learned to pitch much better than when he first came up throwing 100mph. Now he will throw the FB at 94, Curve, slider cutter and occasional change. If you noticed late in the year in the big games he was still getting it up there at 97-98 when he needed and was pumped up.

If he was still just a thrower as he was in 2005 he'd be Joel Zumaya. He knows that if he just tries to blow guys away he will not last long. His periferal stats may be down but his ERA has dropped in consective years over the last 3 years as well. Give me a guy with low ERA, good Save % and guts for my closer any day.

kittle42
12-05-2008, 03:36 PM
the deal is probably for 2-3 prospects coming back to the Sox..

Unfortunately, I agree with you.

palehozenychicty
12-05-2008, 03:41 PM
I agree. And why this close to the meetings? Wouldn't you wait a few days when every team is right there? Unless Milwaukee blows him away.


Exactly. The timing is weird. We'll see.

btrain929
12-05-2008, 03:43 PM
You're not the first one to intepret it this way. Maybe I'm misreading it. But, IMHO it says the CURRENT roster is "bumping up against our payroll limit". "Current" to me means the roster as it is RIGHT NOW with Uribe, Crede, Cabrera, Swisher, and Vazquez gone. To me, if the quote was referring to the 2008 roster BEFORE the trades it would've said something like: "the 2008 roster was bumping up against our payroll limit."

That's my take on it too. Vazquez' deal might not have been a salary dump, but it did help bring us to about even. So if that deal wasn't made, we would have been over our payroll limit, and Dye probably would have been traded to bring us to even. A salary dump is trading someone and getting absolutely nothing/nobody back in return. That wasn't the case with the Vazquez trade.

It is what it is. I don't think there's any special formula we need to look at. If he's telling the truth, don't expect much payroll to be added. But I still think that if he sees a good fit or the right player becomes available, he'll be able to go a little over the limit to get that player.

DVsoxfan
12-05-2008, 03:43 PM
what about manny parra?

btrain929
12-05-2008, 03:44 PM
what about manny parra?

They'd want more than Jenks for Parra.

Pasqua's Mailman
12-05-2008, 03:45 PM
You're not the first one to intepret it this way. Maybe I'm misreading it. But, IMHO it says the CURRENT roster is "bumping up against our payroll limit". "Current" to me means the roster as it is RIGHT NOW with Uribe, Crede, Cabrera, Swisher, and Vazquez gone. To me, if the quote was referring to the 2008 roster BEFORE the trades it would've said something like: "the 2008 roster was bumping up against our payroll limit."

I understand what you are saying but this may be the result of poor or confusing writing by the reporter more than anything else. The word "current" was used by the reporter (not part of KW's quote), then later in the paragraph KW is quoted as saying the trade was not a salary dump.

If he was refering to "current" (as in after the trade) then clearly it was a salary dump. If you put both KW quotes together it seems like he is referring to the roster before the trade. My guess is that KW was explaining that the roster as it stood before the trades (including Swisher) was bumping up against their limit and that these trades aren't salary dumps but a way for them to have some flexibility to both get younger and fill obvious holes.

wsgdf
12-05-2008, 03:45 PM
Weeks might also be able to play CF.

btrain929
12-05-2008, 03:47 PM
Weeks might also be able to play CF.

Might as well go with BA. He can hit .235.

seventyseven
12-05-2008, 03:49 PM
Some of the responses here are insane.

Jenks is a top-notch closer -- one of the best in the AL, and he's affordable for a few more years.

And we're suggesting Cameron in return? Manny Parra? Rickie Weeks (who lost his job to Ray Durham last year)? Corey Hart and his 150+ strikeouts?

Have you all lost your minds? :scratch:

btrain929
12-05-2008, 03:51 PM
Some of the responses here are insane.

Jenks is a top-notch closer -- one of the best in the AL, and he's affordable for a few more years.

And we're suggesting Cameron in return? Manny Parra? Rickie Weeks (who lost his job to Ray Durham last year)? Corey Hart and his 150+ strikeouts?

Have you all lost your minds? :scratch:

The last 2 years Hart has struck out 109 and 99 times......:scratch:

seventyseven
12-05-2008, 03:52 PM
The last 2 years Hart has struck out 109 and 99 times......:scratch:

Sorry. I got a little excited.

Konerko05
12-05-2008, 03:53 PM
Some of the responses here are insane.

Jenks is a top-notch closer -- one of the best in the AL, and he's affordable for a few more years.

And we're suggesting Cameron in return? Manny Parra? Rickie Weeks (who lost his job to Ray Durham last year)? Corey Hart and his 150+ strikeouts?

Have you all lost your minds? :scratch:

No one is really suggesting anything. People are discussing possible pieces in a hypothetical Jenks to Brewers trade.

Who do you think would be a legitimate return for Jenks?

spawn
12-05-2008, 03:53 PM
Sorry. I got a little excited.
We can tell. :redneck

wsgdf
12-05-2008, 03:54 PM
Might as well go with BA. He can hit .235.

Weeks has much more upside - a higher OBP, more speed on the basepaths and probably more power.

seventyseven
12-05-2008, 03:58 PM
No one is really suggesting anything. People are discussing possible pieces in a hypothetical Jenks to Brewers trade.

Who do you think would be a legitimate return for Jenks?

I don't think the Sox should move him. Period. The strength of the bullpen starts at the end and works backward.

dickallen15
12-05-2008, 04:00 PM
I think this may be a bit of a misreading of what he was actually saying. This is the quote from today's Sun-Times:

While Williams admitted the current roster was "bumping up against our payroll limit," he said moving Vazquez and the two years and $23 million left on his deal was done to help the "transition into a new core" rather than a salary dump.

I read that as saying that BEFORE the trades the roster was bumping (at $100 million or so) up against their budget limit... not after the trades. That's a big distinction.
bumping up against our payroll limit was preceded with "As we stand today"

btrain929
12-05-2008, 04:01 PM
Weeks has much more upside - a higher OBP, more speed on the basepaths and probably more power.

I don't know about more power, but the rest you're probably right. But is it worth getting rid of Jenks to upgrade remotely at that position?

Konerko05
12-05-2008, 04:04 PM
I don't think the Sox should move him. Period. The strength of the bullpen starts at the end and works backward.

I don't want to move Jenks either, but I also don't know what kind of deals are on the table.

I also accept the fact that I have absolutely no say in any team decisions. There is no harm in merely discussing the idea.

champagne030
12-05-2008, 04:04 PM
I know everyone would rather have players that can help in 09 but what about some of their prospects.... Angel Salome? Michael Brantley? maybe someone who knows their farm better can throw out better names

Gamel, Salome, Escobar, Jeffress are their top prospects. The problem is Gamel is a butcher at 3rd and we've already got a couple of those and Escobar is a SS and we're pretty set there. Jeffress is a nice young power arm that has command issues with his breaking pitches. Salome looks like a stud. Brantley went to the Indians along with LaPorta for CC. I don't see OF prospects coming from them.

Moses_Scurry
12-05-2008, 04:09 PM
I'm not sure how we're "set" at SS. We're set at one non-1B, non-3B infield position. If a good SS is available, Ramirez can certainly play 2B again.

btrain929
12-05-2008, 04:09 PM
Gamel, Salome, Escobar, Jeffress are their top prospects. The problem is Gamel is a butcher at 3rd and we've already got a couple of those and Escobar is a SS and we're pretty set there. Jeffress is a nice young power arm that has command issues with his breaking pitches. Salome looks like a stud. Brantley went to the Indians along with LaPorta for CC. I don't see OF prospects coming from them.

Cole Gillespie?

tm1119
12-05-2008, 04:14 PM
I would take Para and Weeks/Alcides Escobar for Jenks and Broadway/McCulloch/Egbert.

btrain929
12-05-2008, 04:15 PM
I would take Para and Weeks/Alcides Escobar for Jenks and Broadway/McCulloch/Egbert.

LOL, I'm sure you would. Escobar and Parra aren't going anywhere. And you can just take out the 2nd part of the Sox deal (Broadway/McCulloch/Egbert), because they have negative value.

JUribe1989
12-05-2008, 04:16 PM
I think this is one of those Kenny telling other GMs Jenks is on the market to see what type of deal he could get. I don't think there's any real threat of getting rid of Jenks.

champagne030
12-05-2008, 04:25 PM
I'm not sure how we're "set" at SS. We're set at one non-1B, non-3B infield position. If a good SS is available, Ramirez can certainly play 2B again.

Well, I was told Lillibridge is a stud. :cool:

Seriously, we're way more set at SS than 3B for the future. It looks like Ramirez has SS covered and Beckham will be taking over 2nd sometime in 2010.

Cole Gillespie?

He really hasn't evolved his game the last two seasons. I certainly wouldn't trade Jenks for him.

SoxFan88
12-05-2008, 04:26 PM
Gamel, Salome, Escobar, Jeffress are their top prospects. The problem is Gamel is a butcher at 3rd and we've already got a couple of those and Escobar is a SS and we're pretty set there. Jeffress is a nice young power arm that has command issues with his breaking pitches. Salome looks like a stud. Brantley went to the Indians along with LaPorta for CC. I don't see OF prospects coming from them.


How is his defense? Does he consider DH a position?

btrain929
12-05-2008, 04:28 PM
He really hasn't evolved his game the last two seasons. I certainly wouldn't trade Jenks for him.

Well I wouldn't do it straight up for him, but if he was apart of the trade, I think he would automatically be our best OF prospect in the minors.

champagne030
12-05-2008, 04:40 PM
How is his defense? Does he consider DH a position?

He has one of, if not, the best arm of any minor league catcher. And he's a great athlete. DH will not be in his future until he's very old.

Well I wouldn't do it straight up for him, but if he was apart of the trade, I think he would automatically be our best OF prospect in the minors.

I just don't know about him. He's getting up there in age and I just don't see the improvement. He looks like a good 4th OF. And becoming our best OF prospect isn't saying anything.

jabrch
12-05-2008, 04:44 PM
IF KW really was looking to move Jenks, there would be lots of bidders. He'd be able to get a higher end package for him as Jenks is under control for years to come.

I don't know how I'd feel about a Jenks trade without knowing what we'd get and what we'd do with the closer spot, but I would be expecting that whatever we get back for Bobby would be significant.

I'm sure KW will send out signal flares on a lot of players (already heard Dye, PK and Bobby after already moving Swish and Javy). It will be interesting watching this all play out.

SoxFan88
12-05-2008, 04:48 PM
He has one of, if not, the best arm of any minor league catcher. And he's a great athlete. DH will not be in his future until he's very old.


Could Jenks alone bring in a package of Salome and Hardy (I'm assuming he would play 3B well)?

Rockabilly
12-05-2008, 04:51 PM
Could Jenks alone bring in a package of Salome and Hardy (I'm assuming he would play 3B well)?

nope the Brewers would never do that deal

SoxFan88
12-05-2008, 04:52 PM
nope the Brewers would never do that deal


Who would we have to add to make it happen?

UofCSoxFan
12-05-2008, 04:58 PM
I'd hardly say the IF is set. Other than PK and the missle, it's all question marks.

I reacted the same way. Hell, I don't even think its a given that TCM plays SS next year as many assume. So IF being set = a 1B, a guy that may play either SS or 2B but we don't know which (or even CF, though not likely), a 3 way competition for 2B between unestablished players, assuming TCM moves to SS or a guy not yet being on the roster playing SS if TCM stays at 2B, and a 3 way battle at third between 3 unestablished players then I guess we are seems set. Not to mention there is now way to improve anywhere there. I mean we have warm bodies at all 4 spots...what more could you ask for. :rolleyes:

Lip Man 1
12-05-2008, 08:02 PM
Rock:

Our infield is very far from "set".

Lip

Madscout
12-05-2008, 08:08 PM
Rock:

Our infield is very far from "set".

Lip
Exactly. I don't expect Josh Fields to be at 3rd on opening day, and if he is, I'm not going to be happy.

Dan Mega
12-05-2008, 08:17 PM
Generally if we get wind of a trade, it doesn't happen. Most of the trades KW pulls the trigger on, NOBODY knew about it or reported it before it happened. They're fun to speculate on, but who knows.

thomas35forever
12-05-2008, 08:24 PM
Rock:

Our infield is very far from "set".

Lip
Very true. If our Opening Day infield consists of Konerko, Getz, Ramirez, and Fields/Viciedo, I'm not going to feel to confident about the '09 season.

As far as trading Jenks goes, why are people even considering it? Who do we have to replace him in the closer's role? Dotel can't do it and IIRC, Thornton had trouble closing games too. If we pull off a trade for a closer, then maybe trade him. If Jenks is traded, we better get a closer in exchange.

JermaineDye05
12-05-2008, 08:39 PM
I really don't see Bobby going anywhere this offseason. If he does go it would probably be for something really good. Bobby is one of the few "untouchables" on our team, I put untouchable in quotes because that doesn't mean Kenny's not gonna trade them. He's always willing to trade anyone if the right deal comes to him.

White Sox "Untouchables":

1) Quentin
2) Danks
3) Jenks
4) Alexei
5) Floyd

These are just people currently on the roster, who I view as the highest "untouchable" players. Mind you the reason Beckham isn't on here is because he's not on the roster as of yet. However I feel once he's added, he'll probably be in the top 5 of White Sox untouchables.

Craig Grebeck
12-05-2008, 08:53 PM
I really don't see Bobby going anywhere this offseason. If he does go it would probably be for something really good. Bobby is one of the few "untouchables" on our team, I put untouchable in quotes because that doesn't mean Kenny's not gonna trade them. He's always willing to trade anyone if the right deal comes to him.

White Sox "Untouchables":

1) Quentin
2) Jenks
3) Danks
4) Alexei
5) Floyd

These are just people currently on the roster, who I view as the highest "untouchable" players. Mind you the reason Beckham isn't on here is because he's not on the roster as of yet. However I feel once he's added, he'll probably be in the top 5 of White Sox untouchables.
Having Jenks above Danks is a pretty big mistake.

getonbckthr
12-05-2008, 08:58 PM
I'm saying its Prince Fielder. I don't know what besides Jenks it would take. I would assume Flowers, Poreda and who knows. Then possibly Konerko would not demand a trade but at least reccomend one. Paulie for Figgins jumps up again. Figgins at 2B. Between Paulie's money being moved, and I believe Dye's and Thome's coming off next season there's the money for Prince's arbitration. Thats a scary 3-4 of Quentin and Prince. Prince would obviously move to DH once Thome is gone.

JermaineDye05
12-05-2008, 09:08 PM
Having Jenks above Danks is a pretty big mistake.

Ha I think I got them mixed up. I made that same list yesterday and Danks was 2nd, I think since I just woke up I got the two names mixed up. Danks is ahead of Jenks no doubt.

Sargeant79
12-05-2008, 09:10 PM
I really don't see Bobby going anywhere this offseason. If he does go it would probably be for something really good. Bobby is one of the few "untouchables" on our team, I put untouchable in quotes because that doesn't mean Kenny's not gonna trade them. He's always willing to trade anyone if the right deal comes to him.

White Sox "Untouchables":

1) Quentin
2) Jenks
3) Danks
4) Alexei
5) Floyd

These are just people currently on the roster, who I view as the highest "untouchable" players. Mind you the reason Beckham isn't on here is because he's not on the roster as of yet. However I feel once he's added, he'll probably be in the top 5 of White Sox untouchables.

I see only 3 untouchables on that list - Quentin, Danks, and Alexei. And possibly Beckham. I don't think Kenny would hesitate to move Floyd or Jenks if the right deal presented itself.

One thing I do think you are correct about: None of these guys are untouchable in the true sense of the word. It would take an absolutely overwhelming return, but even the the guys I mentioned could be moved, although I'd put the chance of that happening at under 1%.

getonbckthr
12-05-2008, 09:36 PM
How can Beckham be untouchable? He has been in the system what 5 months?

chunk
12-05-2008, 09:39 PM
He's untouchable because he literally can't be traded. He can't be traded for a year.

CashMan
12-05-2008, 10:00 PM
he's untouchable because he literally can't be traded. He can't be traded for a year.

lol

Zisk77
12-05-2008, 11:14 PM
The last Pitch jenks threw last year was 100mph. his velocity was done because he chose to be a pitcher with 4 plus pitches (more like 7 when you consider he now can cut and sink his fb) rather than a flamethrower.

soxfanreggie
12-05-2008, 11:32 PM
Bring Jenks to arbitration, then at the end of the arbitration years, if he's still good like he is now, give him a decent term deal to stay. Jenks, to me, is the real deal as a closer. He's shown me enough in the past 4 seasons that I trust him in that job and want him to get the ball as much as he can throw.

guillensdisciple
12-05-2008, 11:49 PM
Is it possible for Kenny to slow down a bit? Seriously, how am I supposed to cope with 4 months of no White Sox baseball if he finished the trading process by the end of december.... perhaps he can ask Milwaukee and Cincinnati to stall the trades for a bit so I can continue living my life normally.

oeo
12-05-2008, 11:58 PM
Is it possible for Kenny to slow down a bit? Seriously, how am I supposed to cope with 4 months of no White Sox baseball if he finished the trading process by the end of december.... perhaps he can ask Milwaukee and Cincinnati to stall the trades for a bit so I can continue living my life normally.

Most of the big stuff is usually done by the end of December. January is generally pretty boring on the baseball front.

Then pitchers and catchers report in February, and Spring Training starts in March. So it's not four months.

guillensdisciple
12-06-2008, 12:01 AM
Most of the big stuff is usually done by the end of December. January is generally pretty boring on the baseball front.

Then pitchers and catchers report in February, and Spring Training starts in March. So it's not four months.

True, but my excitement for baseball has never been greater then this year.

I need baseball, January is going to be a month of hell.

sunofgold
12-06-2008, 12:07 AM
He is more of a pitcher now than a flame thrower. I don't care if his doesn't have as many Ks. I only care about save conversions.

And we have absolutely nobody else on our current roster who I feel confident closing. Trade Jenks and you might fill one hole, but you leave a big hole at closer position.

guillensdisciple
12-06-2008, 12:15 AM
He is more of a pitcher now than a flame thrower. I don't care if his doesn't have as many Ks. I only care about save conversions.

And we have absolutely nobody else on our current roster who I feel confident closing. Trade Jenks and you might fill one hole, but you leave a big hole at closer position.

This is dumb, I know, but....

Poreda?

PalehosePlanet
12-06-2008, 12:15 AM
Yeah I know. I know said it half jokingly because of the surplus of infielers Williams seems to be targeting this offseason. If there was a half teal color, I would have used it.

The reason it would only be half is because Weeks is very close to fitting the mold of a leadoff hitter. I'm not advocating the idea, but it's still a possibility.

Second base is not set in stone. Weeks also has a career .352 OBP with an .85% SB success rate.

I just wouldn't want a leadoff who can't hit above .235.

Weeks would have to be part of a much larger package.

At this point I would hesitate to give up Dotel for him, much less Bobby. Also I'd doubt that we would leave him at 2B; he'd probably be a CF project for us.

Also, if The Brewers feel that Escobar is ready to start at SS for them, then JJ Hardy would be the logical choice to be dealt for a closer. Their bullpen at this point is non existant.

I personally like Hardy and would feel much more comfortable with him at SS and Alexei staying at 2B.

sox1970
12-06-2008, 12:19 AM
He is more of a pitcher now than a flame thrower. I don't care if his doesn't have as many Ks. I only care about save conversions.

And we have absolutely nobody else on our current roster who I feel confident closing. Trade Jenks and you might fill one hole, but you leave a big hole at closer position.

Jon Link had a pretty good year at AA, and his K rate was very good. Not sure if they would move him up, but the last time they moved up a closer from AA, it worked out ok.

http://minors.baseball-reference.com/players.cgi?pid=23505

sunofgold
12-06-2008, 12:36 AM
Yes, both guys have potential. But I wouldn't be comfortable with either one closing right now.

JUribe1989
12-06-2008, 12:55 AM
There is a 0% chance Jenks goes anywhere.

Kenny is just putting his name out there to see what teams would offer, and teams are leaking it.

soltrain21
12-06-2008, 12:57 AM
There is a 0% chance Jenks goes anywhere.

Kenny is just putting his name out there to see what teams would offer, and teams are leaking it.


Nobody is untouchable.

guillensdisciple
12-06-2008, 01:21 AM
I agree that nobody is untouchable, but if Jenks leaves the White Sox are more or less in re-building mode... especially if it is for talent.

jabrch
12-06-2008, 01:28 AM
This is dumb, I know, but....

Poreda?

I wouldn't say dumb - I'd just say it is 1 year premature. I'd rather see him work a full year from the pen as a setup guy and work his way into that role if that is his destiny.

JermaineDye05
12-06-2008, 01:38 AM
I wouldn't say dumb - I'd just say it is 1 year premature. I'd rather see him work a full year from the pen as a setup guy and work his way into that role if that is his destiny.

Yeah I don't see the point of making Poreda a closer when you have Matt Thornton. IF Jenks was to go, and I don't think he's going anywhere, but if he were I'd say Matt is your closer or possibly Dotel and Matt becomes your 7th inning guy. I'd say it would have to be Matt though because Matt dominated both lefties and righties last year.

Thornton last year:

VS Righties:

WHIP- 1.02
BA- .218

VS Lefties:

WHIP- 0.97
BA- .170

guillensdisciple
12-06-2008, 02:05 AM
Yeah I don't see the point of making Poreda a closer when you have Matt Thornton. IF Jenks was to go, and I don't think he's going anywhere, but if he were I'd say Matt is your closer or possibly Dotel and Matt becomes your 7th inning guy. I'd say it would have to be Matt though because Matt dominated both lefties and righties last year.

Thornton last year:

VS Righties:

WHIP- 1.02
BA- .218

VS Lefties:

WHIP- 0.97
BA- .170

By numbers he seems destined to be a closer, but you know that mentalities for closers and set-up men are completely different.

Linebrink is lights out, the moment he came into close, the lights were on.

I don't know if you should experiment with Thornton, he was already a project rebuilt and finished by Coop. No need to add more stress and ideas into a person that has possibly established himself as one of the better set-up men in the game.

If you want a closer, either keep Jenks, build one through the farm system, or buy one from free agency. Don't try to make succesful pitchers become something they shouldn't be.

TDog
12-06-2008, 02:34 AM
...

With our IF set who would the Sox be asking for from the Brewers

The White Sox infield is set?

voodoochile
12-06-2008, 02:48 AM
The White Sox infield is set?

Might depend on whether OC accepts arbitration.

Konerko05
12-06-2008, 03:22 AM
I just checked my email and I noticed an email from Whitesox.com saying "Sox seal six-player deal with Br...."

My heart stopped and I came flying to this site to find absolutely nothing.

Then I realized it was the old email I never opened from the Braves trade.

It was an intense 15 seconds. Now I'm not sure how I feel.

CWSpalehoseCWS
12-06-2008, 03:35 AM
I agree that nobody is untouchable, but if Jenks leaves the White Sox are more or less in re-building mode... especially if it is for talent.

Exactly. If the Sox truly believe they are still in a "win-now" mode, Jenks is going nowhere. I'm sure Poreda is going to be Jenks' replacement eventually, but not now or in the next 2 years, IMO. Maybe by 2012. I'd like to see what he can do out of the pen first.

LoveYourSuit
12-06-2008, 05:03 AM
There is a 0% chance Jenks goes anywhere.

Kenny is just putting his name out there to see what teams would offer, and teams are leaking it.


And if he gets a package like what he got for the "untouchable" Brandon McCarthy, Bobby Jenks is gone.

You are dead wrong with your 0% thought. I say it is more like 20/80 he gets traded.

doublem23
12-06-2008, 01:38 PM
And if he gets a package like what he got for the "untouchable" Brandon McCarthy, Bobby Jenks is gone.

You are dead wrong with your 0% thought. I say it is more like 20/80 he gets traded.

I agree with you in principal, but the closer market right now is very buyer friendly, so the Sox probably aren't going to get any offers that blow them away. Therefore, I think 20% is a bit high, but yeah, I don't think anyone on this team is "untouchable."

oeo
12-06-2008, 01:42 PM
I agree with you in principal, but the closer market right now is very buyer friendly, so the Sox probably aren't going to get any offers that blow them away. Therefore, I think 20% is a bit high, but yeah, I don't think anyone on this team is "untouchable."

The Brewers are not going to go out and buy a closer. They just lost their closer to free agency last year, as well as their set up man.

Tragg
12-06-2008, 01:49 PM
Exactly. If the Sox truly believe they are still in a "win-now" mode, Jenks is going nowhere.
I don't think that's true at all.
The Sox have bullpen that has several good veteran arms (Linebrink, Thornton, Dotel,) and will have 2 young arms (among Poreda, Richard and the guy we got from NY). That's still a strong, talented pen. (2 spots still open, for the career middle reliever type).

If we can get a premium package for him, do it.

champagne030
12-06-2008, 07:32 PM
I don't think that's true at all.
The Sox have bullpen that has several good veteran arms (Linebrink, Thornton, Dotel,) and will have 2 young arms (among Poreda, Richard and the guy we got from NY). That's still a strong, talented pen. (2 spots still open, for the career middle reliever type).

If we can get a premium package for him, do it.

Marquez blows.

oeo
12-06-2008, 07:38 PM
Marquez blows.

I seem to remember somebody saying the same about Gavin Floyd around this time last year. Whoops...

Craig Grebeck
12-06-2008, 07:40 PM
I seem to remember somebody saying the same about Gavin Floyd around this time last year. Whoops...
I understand what you're getting at, but there's really no comparison.

JohnTucker0814
12-06-2008, 07:40 PM
How awesome would it be that the Sox put a package together of Jenks plus top prospects for Fielder... Then flip Konerko to the angels for Figgins...

c - A.J.
1b - Fielder
2b - Figgins
SS - Ramirez
3B - Fields
lf - Quentin
cf - Anderson
rf - Dye
dh - Thome

1. figgins
2. ramirez
3. Quentin
4. Fielder
5. Dye
6. Thome
7. A.J.
8. Fields
9. Anderson

Talk about making a big splash and getting younger and better faster!!!!

Fielder for Jenks, Poreda, Getz
Figgins for Konerko

Sign a veteran for the #4 spot

1. buehrle
2. danks
3. floyd
4. vet
5. richard

JohnTucker0814
12-06-2008, 07:42 PM
Or what about:

Konerko, Jenks for Weeks, Fielder

Would Paulie approve a trade to the Brew Crew???? probably not!

champagne030
12-06-2008, 07:43 PM
I seem to remember somebody saying the same about Gavin Floyd around this time last year. Whoops...

Gavin had some talent that he never put together. Jeff, not so much. Apples and oranges....

oeo
12-06-2008, 07:45 PM
I understand what you're getting at, but there's really no comparison.

I agree that they're not at the same level.

My point was, champagne030 tried to tell us all last year that Floyd's breaking ball was gone, he'd lost velocity, etc. In other words, Floyd was junk. He didn't pass up the opportunity to get a little jab in.

I really don't think we will see Marquez in the rotation to start the year. I do think his year will end up a lot like Gavin's first in the organization. Go down to Charlotte, work out the kinks, and come up in September.

Gavin had some talent that he never put together. Jeff, not so much. Apples and oranges....

You said it was gone (even after seeing him much improved in September of 2007). Should I trust you in your conclusion, or the guy that's actually evaluated talent for a living? You don't have much of a track record, which is what I'm getting at.

BTW, wasn't Marquez's changeup after development compared to Pedro Martinez's out of the draft? No talent my ass.

JermaineDye05
12-06-2008, 07:48 PM
Marquez blows.

What makes you say that?

The guy has pretty decent minor league numbers.


43-40 3.60 ERA


I understand what you're getting at, but there's really no comparison.

Gavin had similar minor league numbers

45-43 3.69 ERA

I'm not saying Marquez is going to be as good as Gavin was last year. I'm just saying let's wait to see how he does with the Sox before we make a judgment on him.

Craig Grebeck
12-06-2008, 07:52 PM
For me, I'd take any deal that would net us Weeks and I'd move him to CF.

champagne030
12-06-2008, 07:52 PM
BTW, wasn't Marquez's changeup after development compared to Pedro Martinez's out of the draft? No talent my ass.

Gavin had lost velocity and I said that he tends to "roll" his curveball. That was and is fact. He still gets into trouble when he gets behind his curve.

And no, Marquez doesn't have a pitch compared to Pedro. You're now trying to, in some way, compare Marquez to Pedro??? :rolling::rolling::rolling:

Maybe you're trying to still argue that MacDougal was a great trade.

Tragg
12-06-2008, 07:54 PM
Marquez blows.
He might - we'll find out. The irony of that Swisher trade is that we very possibly threw in a better pitcher than either of the 2 we got in return.
But he might be okay.
Comparisons to Floyd are silly as Floyd had high upside and high talent AND he had pitched well in more of his games than not in 2007, with a few horrid outings clouding his statistics. Marquez has some talent, but didn't have the prior 1/2 year of work.

Craig Grebeck
12-06-2008, 07:55 PM
Gavin had lost velocity and I said that he tends to "roll" his curveball. That was and is fact. He still gets into trouble when he gets behind his curve.

And no, Marquez doesn't have a pitch compared to Pedro. You're now trying to, in some way, compare Marquez to Pedro??? :rolling::rolling::rolling:

Maybe you're trying to still argue that MacDougal was a great trade.
People did make that comparison. Marquez has talent, that's no doubt -- though I wish we'd acquired him in a minor deal, rather than the Swisher trade.

oeo
12-06-2008, 08:01 PM
Gavin had lost velocity and I said that he tends to "roll" his curveball. That was and is fact. He still gets into trouble when he gets behind his curve.

Did you ever say that these were things he could improve upon? No, you just continued with the jabs, much like, "Marquez blows."

And no, Marquez doesn't have a pitch compared to Pedro. You're now trying to, in some way, compare Marquez to Pedro??? :rolling::rolling::rolling:Where did I say that? :?: You said he doesn't have talent, and his changeup has apparently drawn comparisions to Pedro's. I did not compare him to Pedro, learn to ****ing read.

Outside of his plus fastball, Marquez possesses a plus changeup that serves as his strikeout pitch. Drawing comparisons to Pedro Martinez with his changeup...I don't know where the comparisons were drawn, but they were at some point. Continue to laugh it up at what you think you're reading, though. Maybe there's something wrong with your monitor...

Maybe you're trying to still argue that MacDougal was a great trade.Please tell me this is a joke. I never once said that was a great trade. I said that it was a deal that needed to be made at the time, and whining about it now makes no sense. You keep reading what you choose to read, and living in your fantasy world where you can predict outcomes and reverse trades.

balke
12-06-2008, 08:59 PM
For me, I'd take any deal that would net us Weeks and I'd move him to CF.


Really? Weeks is terrible.

Craig Grebeck
12-06-2008, 09:05 PM
Really? Weeks is terrible.
False.

balke
12-06-2008, 09:15 PM
False. As a 2Bman... he'd be a decent fit. As a CFer? Wow, he'd be bad. Everytime I saw him play last season he made defensive errors, and I'm not a fan of adding anymore of this .230 hitter crap to the team. Having Betemit will be bad enough.

Craig Grebeck
12-06-2008, 09:20 PM
As a 2Bman... he'd be a decent fit. As a CFer? Wow, he'd be bad. Everytime I saw him play last season he made defensive errors, and I'm not a fan of adding anymore of this .230 hitter crap to the team. Having Betemit will be bad enough.
He sucks at second base defensively, that's why he'd be moved to CF. He has BJ Upton upside, and he's a solid buy low candidate.

whitesox901
12-06-2008, 09:39 PM
A 400lb 1st basebman?

I would love to have the Prince

oeo
12-06-2008, 09:46 PM
I would love to have the Prince

As Thome's replacement? Sure. I don't see where he fits in next year, though.

The Brewers would be looking for something different than Jenks and Dye, as well.

whitesox901
12-06-2008, 09:50 PM
As Thome's replacement? Sure. I don't see where he fits in next year, though.

The Brewers would be looking for something different than Jenks and Dye, as well.

EDIT: I would love to have the Prince some day lol

Domeshot17
12-06-2008, 10:01 PM
I would not trade Jenks for Weeks, no way. Why trade one of the top 5 closers in baseball year in and year out for a guy who in 1600 career at bats is a .245 hitter without consistently coming close to a decent .800 ops. For a guy who can't hit and lives and dies on his OBP, he K's a TON too. The guys had over 3+ full seasons of not being any good and he can't stay healthy. Bad idea, Getz will put up better numbers then Rickie Weeks.

Craig Grebeck
12-06-2008, 10:05 PM
I would not trade Jenks for Weeks, no way. Why trade one of the top 5 closers in baseball year in and year out for a guy who in 1600 career at bats is a .245 hitter without consistently coming close to a decent .800 ops. For a guy who can't hit and lives and dies on his OBP, he K's a TON too. The guys had over 3+ full seasons of not being any good and he can't stay healthy. Bad idea, Getz will put up better numbers then Rickie Weeks.
I will bet you twenty dollars that Chris Getz does not touch Rickie Weeks this season. Oh my God.

I'm not saying I'd do it for Weeks solely, but if the package is built around Weeks with some solid prospects, I'd do it in a second.

Domeshot17
12-06-2008, 10:09 PM
I will bet you twenty dollars that Chris Getz does not touch Rickie Weeks this season. Oh my God.

I'm not saying I'd do it for Weeks solely, but if the package is built around Weeks with some solid prospects, I'd do it in a second.

Weeks impresses me Zero. I am not a big Getz fan, but Im fairly certain he can come close to the .740 ops Weeks is good for. He'll hit for a better average, walk less, play better D, less home run power, more gappers/doubles, similiar stolen base ability. The difference won't be anything close to being worth trading Jenks for.

edit: If Getz is our full time starter at 2b, I would take that bet that Getz comes close to the same OPS Weeks has.

Craig Grebeck
12-06-2008, 10:15 PM
Weeks impresses me Zero. I am not a big Getz fan, but Im fairly certain he can come close to the .740 ops Weeks is good for. He'll hit for a better average, walk less, play better D, less home run power, more gappers/doubles, similiar stolen base ability. The difference won't be anything close to being worth trading Jenks for.

edit: If Getz is our full time starter at 2b, I would take that bet that Getz comes close to the same OPS Weeks has.
Deal.

DoItForDanPasqua
12-06-2008, 10:49 PM
Jenks is a top-notch closer -- one of the best in the AL, and he's affordable for a few more years.
:scratch:

Absolutely. Jenks has been a solid, consistent closer that still has three more years before free agency. The Sox should be getting a lot in return for him. I'm not sure if there is anyone on the Brewers, save Ryan Braun, whom I highly doubt is on the market, worth taking in exchange.

guillensdisciple
12-06-2008, 11:03 PM
Absolutely. Jenks has been a solid, consistent closer that still has three more years before free agency. The Sox should be getting a lot in return for him. I'm not sure if there is anyone on the Brewers, save Ryan Braun, whom I highly doubt is on the market, worth taking in exchange.

They have that one lefty pitcher who throws some filthy stuff, if we can pry him away from them, I will make a pla-do statue of Jenks in commemoration of his White Sox years.

WhiteSoxFan84
12-07-2008, 01:32 AM
the brewers won't move braun or fielder unless they asked to be moved. that'll be one of the best righty/lefty, middle of the lineup combos in the history of the game.

manny parra for jenks? not bad, but as someone else suggested, the brewers would ask for more.
rickie weeks? we can probably wait until he fails again in 2009 and get him for next to nothing next offseason.

the name i didn't read yet (ive only skimmed through 4 of the 11 pages in this thread) is yovanni gallardo. he is probably their ACE now, but if they re-sign sabathia, they'll be able to move gallardo a lot easier. however, that's a big if and IF it happens, it won't be for a while. now of course, i know we can't get gallardo straight up for jenks, so we'd have to give them more. why not jermaine dye? we heard about a jenks/dye package to the mets, how about we deal them to milwaukee for gallardo and either a solid role player or a good, not top, prospect. brewers can then move hart to cf (he wont be the best out there but they'd sacrifice a little defense for an outfield of braun, hart, and dye) to make room for dye in rf. cameron would have to be dealt of course. no, not to us.

our lineup would suffer as the middle would go from quentin/thome/dye/konerko to quentin/thome/konerko/pierzynski, but our rotation would look extremely promising, buehrle/floyd/danks/gallardo/spring training standout or veteran free agent.

but i have a feeling the brewers would reject jenks and dye for gallardo. or am i overpricing gallardo's stock?

WhiteSox5187
12-07-2008, 01:46 AM
Maybe I'm missing something, but why do the Sox want to give up Jenks again? I know his strikeouts and velocity are down (though I seem to recall a couple of games in September when he reached back and threw some heat), but he still gets the job done! He's still one of the premier closers in the league! And it's not like closers grow on trees!

TheOldRoman
12-07-2008, 02:37 AM
Maybe I'm missing something, but why do the Sox want to give up Jenks again? I know his strikeouts and velocity are down (though I seem to recall a couple of games in September when he reached back and threw some heat), but he still gets the job done! He's still one of the premier closers in the league! And it's not like closers grow on trees!They don't. They are seeing what they could get for him, and trying to get other teams to overpay. The only way they trade Bobby is if they get a king's ransom. And, once again, they wouldn't trade him unless they get at least one player who could step in and give them great production in 09.

BadBobbyJenks
12-07-2008, 05:25 AM
Gallarado is going no where, Parra is a much more reasonable possibility, but I highly doubt Jenks would net him by himself.

guillensdisciple
12-07-2008, 12:56 PM
BadBobby, what are you going to do with your name sake is Jenks is traded?

oeo
12-07-2008, 12:57 PM
BadBobby, what are you going to do with your name sake is Jenks is traded?

It becomes vintage, like mine. :cool:

forte
12-07-2008, 01:33 PM
Maybe I'm missing something, but why do the Sox want to give up Jenks again?

Selling high. Something they should have done with Crede after 06 or the first half of this year.

Rockin Robin
12-07-2008, 01:53 PM
I don't like any of these.

Unless we go back in time and get John Jaha and Greg Vaughn.

btrain929
12-07-2008, 02:37 PM
the name i didn't read yet (ive only skimmed through 4 of the 11 pages in this thread) is yovanni gallardo. he is probably their ACE now, but if they re-sign sabathia, they'll be able to move gallardo a lot easier. however, that's a big if and IF it happens, it won't be for a while. now of course, i know we can't get gallardo straight up for jenks, so we'd have to give them more. why not jermaine dye? we heard about a jenks/dye package to the mets, how about we deal them to milwaukee for gallardo and either a solid role player or a good, not top, prospect. brewers can then move hart to cf (he wont be the best out there but they'd sacrifice a little defense for an outfield of braun, hart, and dye) to make room for dye in rf. cameron would have to be dealt of course. no, not to us.

our lineup would suffer as the middle would go from quentin/thome/dye/konerko to quentin/thome/konerko/pierzynski, but our rotation would look extremely promising, buehrle/floyd/danks/gallardo/spring training standout or veteran free agent.

but i have a feeling the brewers would reject jenks and dye for gallardo. or am i overpricing gallardo's stock?

1) If they resign CC, Gallardo will just become their #2, so he still won't be available.
2) Trading Cameron just to make room for Dye doesn't make much sense for them. It would weaken their outfield defense tremendously, and they ALREADY have Braun in LF, so it can't afford to be weakened anymore.

WhiteSoxFan84
12-07-2008, 02:56 PM
1) If they resign CC, Gallardo will just become their #2, so he still won't be available.
2) Trading Cameron just to make room for Dye doesn't make much sense for them. It would weaken their outfield defense tremendously, and they ALREADY have Braun in LF, so it can't afford to be weakened anymore.

So what you're saying is.... there's a chance? :redneck

btrain929
12-07-2008, 04:09 PM
So what you're saying is.... there's a chance? :redneck

If there's alcohol and/or bribery involved, there's a chance that anything can happen.... :gulp:

guillensdisciple
12-07-2008, 04:27 PM
If there's alcohol and/or bribery involved, there's a chance that anything can happen.... :gulp:

Oh yes! Best combination of horrible factors to exist on this planet.

gr8mexico
12-07-2008, 04:30 PM
I don't like any of these.

Unless we go back in time and get John Jaha and Greg Vaughn.
Maybe we can trade for Jaime Navarro.:D:

Rockin Robin
12-07-2008, 05:48 PM
Maybe we can trade for Jaime Navarro.:D:

Oh good call. I wouldn't even need a time machine, I'd take the 2008 version of Jaime Navarro.

Get it done, Kenny.

BadBobbyJenks
12-07-2008, 09:41 PM
BadBobby, what are you going to do with your name sake is Jenks is traded?

I will be disappointed for sure as I also have the home jersey as well. Though, it will be nostalgic years from now.

With that said I'd rather not think about it.

MHOUSE
12-07-2008, 11:29 PM
I know everyone would rather have players that can help in 09 but what about some of their prospects.... Angel Salome? Michael Brantley? maybe someone who knows their farm better can throw out better names

Alicedes Escobar?

ComiskeyBrewer
12-08-2008, 02:43 AM
Alicedes Escobar?

He was deemed pretty much untouchable when trading for CC, i doubt Jenks will pull him.