PDA

View Full Version : Roy Halladay is now available


Pages : [1] 2

gr8mexico
07-07-2009, 11:03 AM
per mlbtraderumors.com
The BlueJays have made Roy Halladay available.
What would it take to get him?
I'm sure they would want Gordon Beckham.

HebrewHammer
07-07-2009, 11:12 AM
If Poreda and Richard are enough for Peavy, how much more could Halladay possibly cost?

dwalteroo
07-07-2009, 11:14 AM
Poreda, Richard, Fields, Viceido?

mantis1212
07-07-2009, 11:14 AM
How long is he currently signed for? Poreda and Richard, absolutely, throw in Fields also. Anybody else for the minors they can have as well. Get it done!

jabrch
07-07-2009, 11:16 AM
If Poreda and Richard are enough for Peavy, how much more could Halladay possibly cost?

Are the Jays in as dire of straits as San Diego?

That said, if there is a package where Poreda and Clayton are the best two prospects we give up for Roy Halladay, I'd be all over this. Take any other three prospects not on our Major League club...

I'm sure that wouldn't be enough. I'm guessing they'd want at least one "CAN'T MISS" prospect (even many of those miss - but you know what I mean). We have none of those in the minors right now.

The Vernon Wells and Alex Rios deals are killing Toronto. Wells is going to average over 20mm per year for the next 5 years. Rios will be making 14mm per over that same time period. Ricciardi has done an awful job managing the payroll on that squad. I can't understand how he possibly still has a job.

jabrch
07-07-2009, 11:17 AM
How long is he currently signed for? Poreda and Richard, absolutely, throw in Fields also. Anybody else for the minors they can have as well. Get it done!

He's scheduled to make 15.75m next year before becoming a FA.

DirtySox
07-07-2009, 11:19 AM
Poreda and Clayton heading the Peavy deal was a steal. It was because of the need for the Padres to dump his salary. It would take a much better package to acquire Doc.

Noneck
07-07-2009, 11:29 AM
Ok, I'll say it. Poreda, Richard and Beckham. If that's not enough, find out what else is needed.

ms620
07-07-2009, 11:34 AM
Ok, I'll say it. Poreda, Richard and Beckham. If that's not enough, find out what else is needed.

I do not understand how anyone can support including Beckham in a trade for Halladay. Halladay is a semi-short term move and losing Beckham this year signifanctly hurts the offense as Fields will have to move back in to a starting role. You cannot include Beckham. It makes no sense.

Noneck
07-07-2009, 11:36 AM
I do not understand how anyone can support including Beckham in a trade for Halladay. Halladay is a semi-short term move and losing Beckham this year signifanctly hurts the offense as Fields will have to move back in to a starting role. You cannot include Beckham. It makes no sense.
One rarely has the opportunity to get the best pitcher in MLB. You have to give to get.

tm1119
07-07-2009, 11:38 AM
Ok, I'll say it. Poreda, Richard and Beckham. If that's not enough, find out what else is needed.

No way. There is no way we could do that for a year and a 1/2 of a 32 year old pitcher. Especially since I still don't believe that Halladay would make us the front runners in the AL for the WS.

Dibbs
07-07-2009, 11:38 AM
Ok, I'll say it. Poreda, Richard and Beckham. If that's not enough, find out what else is needed.

Beckham for a 32 year old pitcher AND whatever else is needed? LOL, I think I'll pass on that one.

cws05champ
07-07-2009, 11:40 AM
I do not understand how anyone can support including Beckham in a trade for Halladay. Halladay is a semi-short term move and losing Beckham this year signifanctly hurts the offense as Fields will have to move back in to a starting role. You cannot include Beckham. It makes no sense.
Beckham is off limits!! You can not trade this guy!

I would rather trade Alexei than Beckham at this point. I think the untouchables from our minors should be Dan Hudson and Flowers. Poreda, Richard...buh bye.

Fred Manrique
07-07-2009, 11:40 AM
Beckham for a 32 year old pitcher AND whatever else is needed? LOL, I think I'll pass on that one.

I agree. I looooove Halladay but Beckham has just shown too much and getting rid of him among others just puts more holes in our Major League roster. The same package as for Peavy and I'm in for sure.

SoxGirl4Life
07-07-2009, 11:43 AM
Ok, I'll say it. Poreda, Richard and Beckham. If that's not enough, find out what else is needed.


this is lunacy

DirtySox
07-07-2009, 11:46 AM
Ok, I'll say it. Poreda, Richard and Beckham. If that's not enough, find out what else is needed.

Er what?

Beckham is untouchable. He is cost controlled, young, has tremendous upside and will be a mainstay for years. It would be rather silly to trade a major cog in the next capable White Sox team for a year and a half of Doc. Especially when we aren't a team that is one piece away from a World Series.

Rocky Soprano
07-07-2009, 11:51 AM
Ok, I'll say it. Poreda, Richard and Beckham. If that's not enough, find out what else is needed.

I'm glad you are not running the team.

Noneck
07-07-2009, 11:52 AM
Getting Halladay now I think makes the Sox the favs to win the central. Then I see no reason why they cant advance real deep in the playoffs. Next year would be the same. Will Beckhams worth ever be good enough to compare to that? Live for today is my philosophy.

jsg-07
07-07-2009, 11:55 AM
I know its a pipe dream.. but wow.. could you imagine that rotation?

RH, MB, JD, GF, JC

I do think if he came here, Hawk would would go ape ****

oeo
07-07-2009, 11:56 AM
One rarely has the opportunity to get the best pitcher in MLB. You have to give to get.

You also rarely have a 22-year-old rookie, fresh out of college who is on the verge of stardom. Beckham will not and should not be dealt.

It is not like Beckham is our only trading chip. We have a pretty good farm now.

Getting Halladay now I think makes the Sox the favs to win the central. Then I see no reason why they cant advance real deep in the playoffs. Next year would be the same. Will Beckhams worth ever be good enough to compare to that? Live for today is my philosophy.

I think you're undervaluing him. His value is sky high right now. He's been fairly successful in the big leagues a year after being drafted.

Noneck
07-07-2009, 12:02 PM
You also rarely have a 22-year-old rookie, fresh out of college who is on the verge of stardom. Beckham will not and should not be dealt.

It is not like Beckham is our only trading chip. We have a pretty good farm now.

I am not saying dump Beckham, but if that's what it takes, you do it.

oeo
07-07-2009, 12:04 PM
I am not saying dump Beckham, but if that's what it takes, you do it.

I disagree. Beckham should not go anywhere, period. We have other pieces.

Sargeant79
07-07-2009, 12:05 PM
You also rarely have a 22-year-old rookie, fresh out of college who is on the verge of stardom. Beckham will not and should not be dealt.



I agree completely. Beckham just seems like he is going to be a truly great player. Add in the fact that he is going to be fairly cheap for the next several years, and I really think he should not be moved under any circumstances.

That said, I also think he's the only guy on the team who merits that "untouchable" label. If the deal can get done with any combination of young players that doesn't include Beckham, I'd do it.

oeo
07-07-2009, 12:06 PM
I agree completely. Beckham just seems like he is going to be a truly great player. Add in the fact that he is going to be fairly cheap for the next several years, and I really think he should not be moved under any circumstances.

That said, I also think he's the only guy on the team who merits that "untouchable" label. If the deal can get done with any combination of young players that doesn't include Beckham, I'd do it.

I think Danks should also be untouchable.

Noneck
07-07-2009, 12:07 PM
I disagree. Beckham should not go anywhere, period. We have other pieces.
If the other pieces are good enough, I'm in your corner. If not, whatever it takes.

oeo
07-07-2009, 12:08 PM
If the other pieces are good enough, I'm in your corner. If not, whatever it takes.

Again, we've revamped the farm. There are plenty of other pieces down there, unlike a couple of years ago.

Even if they're not, I still don't deal Beckham. Halladay is damn good, but also nearing the age where we should start seeing a bit of a decline. You're willing to give up Beckham's entire career?

AzureJazzMan
07-07-2009, 12:10 PM
Richard, Poreda, Flowers, Fields, Allen, and Alexei should get it done.

Noneck
07-07-2009, 12:10 PM
Again, we've revamped the farm. There are plenty of other pieces down there, unlike a couple of years ago.

I'll love it if it can be done without Beckham but don't let this opportunity pass if it can't.

Rocky Soprano
07-07-2009, 12:11 PM
I am not saying dump Beckham, but if that's what it takes, you do it.

That is exactly what you are saying.
Adding Roy does not guarantee a World Series title. Beckham is going to be a star, why you would be willing to give him up is beyond me.

akingamongstmen
07-07-2009, 12:15 PM
Richard, Poreda, Flowers, Fields, Allen, and Alexei should get it done.

Absolutely not. Why don't we just throw in Beckham, Getz, Danks and Floyd, too?

I think Doc is the best pitcher in baseball, but he is a 32 year-old pitcher. An injury (look at Peavy) could derail the whole thing pretty quickly. We'd be terrible for years.

thomas35forever
07-07-2009, 12:17 PM
As long as they don't package Beckham, I'm happy with giving up anyone else. Beckham's the most valuable part of our future. Trade him and despite our surplus of young corner infielders, we'll live to regret it because he'll tear it up somewhere else.

dwalteroo
07-07-2009, 12:17 PM
Totally disagree with Beckham being included in any trade; he is way too valuable. Remember we would only be getting Doc for a year and a half, and then would have to sign him again.

Richard, Poreda, Ramirez?

Noneck
07-07-2009, 12:19 PM
That is exactly what you are saying.
Adding Roy does not guarantee a World Series title. Beckham is going to be a star, why you would be willing to give him up is beyond me.
I'm not giving up on Beckham but Halladay gives the Sox a Real shot now. You are acquiring the premier pitcher in baseball. A Rotation of Burls, Doc, Denks and Floyd would give the Sox a Very formidable rotation to get to the playoffs and then deep into.

WisSoxFan
07-07-2009, 12:21 PM
Totally disagree with Beckham being included in any trade; he is way too valuable. Remember we would only be getting Doc for a year and a half, and then would have to sign him again.

Richard, Poreda, Ramirez?

That's the three I was thinking of as well. The question is then who plays third (or short) depending on where Beckham would play if such a deal were to happen. I abhor the idea of Fields at third. Could Nix play short regularly?

It's fun to dream. :gulp:

jabrch
07-07-2009, 12:22 PM
I do not understand how anyone can support including Beckham in a trade for Halladay. Halladay is a semi-short term move and losing Beckham this year signifanctly hurts the offense as Fields will have to move back in to a starting role. You cannot include Beckham. It makes no sense.

Now if they want to throw in Scott Rolen...

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 12:24 PM
You guys seriously would not trade Beckham for perhaps the best pitcher in baseball today in Roy? :scratch:

Let's not all get carried away here with the great potential in Beckham. I'm very excited about how good he could one day be, but Roy Halladay is the real deal, TODAY.

Trading Beckham is a once in a lifetime move if you have a chance to get the best pitcher in baseball.

RedHeadPaleHoser
07-07-2009, 12:24 PM
SP isn't what we need - we need an infield or a bullpen that doesn't piss itself.

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 12:26 PM
SP isn't what we need - we need an infield or a bullpen that doesn't piss itself.


SP at the level of a Roy Halladay is needed on 29 other clubs.

asindc
07-07-2009, 12:28 PM
You guys seriously would not trade Beckham for perhaps the best pitcher in baseball today in Roy? :scratch:

Let's not all get carried away here with the great potential in Beckham. I'm very excited about how good he could one day be, but Roy Halladay is the real deal, TODAY.

Trading Beckham is a once in a lifetime move if you have a chance to get the best pitcher in baseball.

IF Halladay had at least 2 more years left on his contract after this year AND was no older than 28 at this time, then MAYBE. None of those things are true, however, so no Beckham included, no Buehrle included, no Danks included, no TCQ included, and no Floyd included. Everyone else is up for discussion, depending on the package.

oeo
07-07-2009, 12:29 PM
You guys seriously would not trade Beckham for perhaps the best pitcher in baseball today in Roy? :scratch:

Let's not all get carried away here with the great potential in Beckham. I'm very excited about how good he could one day be, but Roy Halladay is the real deal, TODAY.

Trading Beckham is a once in a lifetime move if you have a chance to get the best pitcher in baseball.

It appears Beckham is the real deal, today, as well. It would go down as a terrible trade unless we won a title, and we better be making some more moves to get it done next year.

I'll repeat myself: Beckham should not be traded under any circumstances (Danks too). The Gordon Beckham's of the world do not come around very often.

tm1119
07-07-2009, 12:30 PM
You guys seriously would not trade Beckham for perhaps the best pitcher in baseball today in Roy? :scratch:

Let's not all get carried away here with the great potential in Beckham. I'm very excited about how good he could one day be, but Roy Halladay is the real deal, TODAY.

Trading Beckham is a once in a lifetime move if you have a chance to get the best pitcher in baseball.

Halladay being the best pitcher is very debatable. But that aside, its Halladay for a year and a 1/2 on a very flawed team. If this team was 10 games above .500 and cruising into the playoffs it would be a very different story. Adding Halladay to this team does not even put this team as the front runner in the AL. The Red Sox and Yankees are still far better teams than we are.

DirtySox
07-07-2009, 12:31 PM
I'd rather go after Ricky Romero.

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 12:32 PM
IF Halladay had at least 2 more years left on his contract after this year AND was no older than 28 at this time, then MAYBE. None of those things are true, however, so no Beckham included, no Buehrle included, no Danks included, no TCQ included, and no Floyd included. Everyone else is up for discussion, depending on the package.


I think it would be up to the Blue Jays to decide who they want. Not us.

RedHeadPaleHoser
07-07-2009, 12:33 PM
SP at the level of a Roy Halladay is needed on 29 other clubs.

Suit -

No argument. But, let's look at this fact:

How many games have our SP factored a loss or ND based on poor infield defense or blown leads/ties by our bullpen? Halladay will not make Alexei make less errors, or Linebrink not give up a meatball pitch.

All I am saying is we need less errors in the IF & a bullpen that hold us in games more consistently. Halladay will not give us that at all.

Rocky Soprano
07-07-2009, 12:33 PM
I think it would be up to the Blue Jays to decide who they want. Not us.

But the Sox have to agree. It takes two.

wassagstdu
07-07-2009, 12:34 PM
Ramirez, Jenks and Fields? Ramirez, Fields, and Richard or Poreda? Yes.

Beckham? No thanks.

oeo
07-07-2009, 12:34 PM
I think it would be up to the Blue Jays to decide who they want. Not us.

If that's how the Blue Jays operate, then they're never going to come out happy with any move.

You, obviously, cannot say, 'this is who you want,' but you can say 'this is who you can't have.'

dwalteroo
07-07-2009, 12:37 PM
That's the three I was thinking of as well. The question is then who plays third (or short) depending on where Beckham would play if such a deal were to happen. I abhor the idea of Fields at third. Could Nix play short regularly?

It's fun to dream. :gulp:

I agree - I don't like Fields at 3B. I think the powers that be like Nix enough to let him try out SS full time. I'd rather trade Poreda, Richard, Fields, but it might take Ramirez to work instead.

AzureJazzMan
07-07-2009, 12:41 PM
Absolutely not. Why don't we just throw in Beckham, Getz, Danks and Floyd, too?

I think Doc is the best pitcher in baseball, but he is a 32 year-old pitcher. An injury (look at Peavy) could derail the whole thing pretty quickly. We'd be terrible for years.

Because we have depth at these positions up with the big ball club now, and in the minors. Plus, we just had a solid "position player" draft class (still ticked about not grabbing more pitching than we did)

We would still have Beckham which seems the consensus of most of the people posting in this strand.

Halladay is a game changer, and again... Doc, Burls, Danks, Floyd, and Contreras. THAT is one damn formidable starting 5.

asindc
07-07-2009, 12:43 PM
I think it would be up to the Blue Jays to decide who they want. Not us.

It's up to the Sox to decide who to trade. If Toronto doesn't like it, then the trade does not happen. If a trade happens between the Sox and Toronto, Toronto will not be the only team dictating terms.

TomBradley72
07-07-2009, 01:19 PM
I'll love it if it can be done without Beckham but don't let this opportunity pass if it can't.

Complete insanity. So we'd have Fields back at 3rd base? Any gains we get from Halladay would be offset by regressing at 3rd base both on defense and offense. So we'll lose at least 6 years of Beckham so we can have 1.5 seasons of Halladay with Fields as our 3rd baseman?

No thanks. 1,000,000 times....no thanks.

getonbckthr
07-07-2009, 01:21 PM
Because of potential, contract and positions he can play Gordon Beckham can be traded for exactly 1 person in baseball. Tim Lincecum.

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 01:27 PM
Well, one thing helping us would be the fact that the Jays will not trade to their own division. So the Yankees and Red Sox are out of this.


Teams to be concerned about:

1) Tigers
2) Angels
3) Brewers
4) Cardinals
5) Phillies
6) Dodgers


All of the above have money to spend IMO except for Det.

I don't know if minor league talent they can compare to us.

chaotic8512
07-07-2009, 01:29 PM
Because of potential, contract and positions he can play Gordon Beckham can be traded for exactly 1 person in baseball. Tim Lincecum.

Pujols?

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 01:32 PM
Because of potential, contract and positions he can play Gordon Beckham can be traded for exactly 1 person in baseball. Tim Lincecum.


Yeah, but that's the same reason SF is not trading Lincencum any time soon. Let alone would they trade him to only get Gordon Beckham.

DirtySox
07-07-2009, 01:32 PM
Let us not forget the lovely NTC that Doc has.

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 01:34 PM
Pujols?


I could actually list 20+ players I would trade Beckham for, straight up.

Pujols is definately one of them.

Tragg
07-07-2009, 01:40 PM
Yes, let's trade every young player we have for Halliday. Who cares of Thome, Konerko and AJ need to be replaced - we can find some more DeWayne Wises to take their place.

He's all you need - after all, look at all of the winning the Blue Jays did with him!

Look at ARizona - they trade their farm system for one of the elite; and look at all of the winning they've done!!!

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 01:46 PM
Yes, let's trade every young player we have for Halliday. Who cares of Thome, Konerko and AJ need to be replaced - we can find some more DeWayne Wises to take their place.

He's all you need - after all, look at all of the winning the Blue Jays did with him!

Look at ARizona - they trade their farm system for one of the elite; and look at all of the winning they've done!!!


Hey, look at 2005. The Sox line-up was built off a bunch of scrappy parts but yet they had PITCHING!!! THE BEST DAMN PITCHING!!!

asindc
07-07-2009, 01:51 PM
Well, one thing helping us would be the fact that the Jays will not trade to their own division. So the Yankees and Red Sox are out of this.


Teams to be concerned about:

1) Tigers
2) Angels
3) Brewers
4) Cardinals
5) Phillies
6) Dodgers

All of the above have money to spend IMO except for Det.

I don't know if minor league talent they can compare to us.

I really don't care if he is traded to the NL. In fact, I prefer it if the Sox can't swing a favorable deal. I agree that the Tigers don't have the funds/resources for it. LAAAAAA might do it, if only because their owner will want to "win" the Halladay sweepstakes. Anybody else on that list can have him, since it will have minimal impact on the Sox.

getonbckthr
07-07-2009, 01:57 PM
Pujols?
Honestly? Knowing how the Sox work as far as a salary restriction basis and considering our ballpark I dont think we need a Pujols. Sure it would be nice but I think you can find a guy who can play 1B and 35 hrs and drive in 100 alot easier than a 2B/SS who can give us 25-30 and 100 RBIs. I would probably send Beckham for Pujols but I would actually have to think about it. Lincecum would need zero thought.

MeteorsSox4367
07-07-2009, 02:12 PM
How about C.J. Retherford for Halladay straight up? Hawk would be ticked off for a while, but he'd get over it.

I fully agree with the prior posters who said in no way should Beckham be included. This guy is only going to be an integral part of the Sox for the next 12-15 years or so.

chaotic8512
07-07-2009, 02:25 PM
I could actually list 20+ players I would trade Beckham for, straight up.

Pujols is definately one of them.

Oh, what the hell, let's go for it.

Lincecum, Pujols, Felix Hernandez, Cole Hamels, Zack Grienke, Johan Santana, Dan Haren, Matt Cain, Chad Billingsley, Ian Kinsler, Chase Utley, Hanley Ramirez, Ryan Braun (hey, maybe Bob Melvin will give Ryan a taste of his own medicine... hey, we'll take the bullet.), Evan Longoria, Joe Mauer, David Wright, and Jose Reyes.

I could only come up with 18. Fill in the gaps. :tongue:

Honestly? Knowing how the Sox work as far as a salary restriction basis and considering our ballpark I dont think we need a Pujols. Sure it would be nice but I think you can find a guy who can play 1B and 35 hrs and drive in 100 alot easier than a 2B/SS who can give us 25-30 and 100 RBIs. I would probably send Beckham for Pujols but I would actually have to think about it. Lincecum would need zero thought.

Alright, I'll bite. Yes, honestly.

And before I further proceed with this complete hypothetical, I'll go on the record to say I'd hate the idea of trading him for 1 1/2 years of Halladay. There's not much beyond a sure thing I'd want to trade for him (see above). Yes, Beckham could be that player you described, and if so, I'll be absolutely thrilled. But it's all based on potential at this point. A year later, the story may be completely different. But if you have the chance to trade for a guy who has a realistic chance of breaking 700 HRs, 700 2Bs with a .300+ AVG, .400+ OBP, 1.000+ OPS, WHILE giving you GG defense... one of the best players of all-time, you do it, shake GM John Mozeliak's hand, and laugh all the way home.

(By the way, not at all picking on you with the list of players... just really bored. In fact, in deference to the good point you made, I removed Prince Fielder and Joey Votto because as you said, those type of numbers can be achieved by many, acquirable, mortal first basemen. So yeah... way to ruin my list. :redneck)

russ99
07-07-2009, 02:31 PM
Halladay is totally a guy Kenny would go all-in for.

But all-in doesn't mean Beckham. We'd need a heck of a ballplayer for more than the 1.5 years we'd have Halladay in order to deal Beckham.

I'd think Richard and Fields would be the main pieces, since they seemingly don't have a long future here, but would be good acquisitions for Toronto who wants to cut payroll and re-boot.

Then add 1-2 minor league starters and/or Poreda, and maybe top it off with a Flowers/Viciedo/Shelby high-end prospect.

Maybe we'd need to get an extra player at $1M+ to make it pan out.

chaotic8512
07-07-2009, 02:41 PM
Halladay is totally a guy Kenny would go all-in for.

But all-in doesn't mean Beckham. We'd need a heck of a ballplayer for more than the 1.5 years we'd have Halladay in order to deal Beckham.

I'd think Richard and Fields would be the main pieces, since they seemingly don't have a long future here, but would be good acquisitions for Toronto who wants to cut payroll and re-boot.

Then add 1-2 minor league starters and/or Poreda, and maybe top it off with a Flowers/Viciedo/Shelby high-end prospect.

Maybe we'd need to get an extra player at $1M+ to make it pan out.

Honestly, considering the fact that it is just 1 1/2 years we'd be getting, I think it would be a pretty fair deal for them to be able to have 4+ years of control of three guys who could fill SP, 3B, and RP. Rolen's gone after next year, so that's a spot worth filling. I honestly think the 3B situation for us the past three years has really played mind games with Fields... a change of scenery would do him good. Richard would add to their already talented pool of young starters. And with a pitching staff as banged up as the Blue Jays are, Poreda could be very useful for them this year. Just look at who they're starting tonight. What a fun last name... Rzepczynski.

The Immigrant
07-07-2009, 02:43 PM
Toronto has loads of cheap, young pitching (Litsch, Marcum, Richmond, Romero, Cecil, Ray...). They don't need Richard or Poreda. They need cheap positional players, preferably on the left side of the infield and behind the plate. I assume the return package would have to include either (1) Beckham, (2) Ramirez or (3) Flowers, or (1) or (2) plus (3).

TheVulture
07-07-2009, 02:51 PM
Buehrle and Halladay would be the best 1-2 punch in baseball. Follow that up with Danks and Floyd you've got the best rotation in baseball. As great as Beckham seems to be, I don't think an infielder can ever be as valuable as the best starting pitcher in baseball. Tony Womack and Craig Counsell will do the trick when you've got Johnson and Schilling.

kaufsox
07-07-2009, 02:56 PM
If I'm the blue jays, no way Poreda and Richard are enough pitching in return for Halladay. Fields wouldn't exactly turn my head either, sure I'd like to get younger at 3B, but Fields isn't exactly the best candidate. Again, if I'm the jays, I would want at least one proven major leaguer in the trade, preferably younger, so no JD, AJ, PK, Scottie, or Jose. However, my guess is that the other teams contending in both leagues are going to come up with more attractive packages.

chaotic8512
07-07-2009, 02:57 PM
Toronto has loads of cheap, young pitching (Litsch, Marcum, Richmond, Romero, Cecil, Ray...). They don't need Richard or Poreda. They need cheap positional players, preferably on the left side of the infield and behind the plate. I assume the return package would have to include either (1) Beckham, (2) Ramirez or (3) Flowers, or (1) or (2) plus (3).

They've already got a top prospect at catcher... Arencibia, I think is his name? And you're right, they've got a ton of talent at SP (they have about 6 guys who could be in their starting 5: McGowan, Marcum, Cecil, Litsch, Romero, and Richmond). But I think pitching is the one commodity you should stockpile. The Blue Jays' DL is a perfect example of why you should do that.

TheVulture
07-07-2009, 03:00 PM
I'd think Richard and Fields would be the main pieces, since they seemingly don't have a long future here, but would be good acquisitions for Toronto who wants to cut payroll and re-boot.


That is laughable - this is Roy Halladay we're talking about here, right?

russ99
07-07-2009, 03:09 PM
That is laughable - this is Roy Halladay we're talking about here, right?

We'd still need to give up substantial high-end prospects to make that work, like I said in the rest of my post.

I don't think something like Richard, Fields, Poreda, Carter and Flowers would be laughable to Toronto.

Harry Chappas
07-07-2009, 03:17 PM
Absolutely not. Why don't we just throw in Beckham, Getz, Danks and Floyd, too?

I think Doc is the best pitcher in baseball, but he is a 32 year-old pitcher. An injury (look at Peavy) could derail the whole thing pretty quickly. We'd be terrible for years.


I agree. I don't want to sell the farm for a short-term rental. Allen and Flowers are a big part of a bright - and young - future.

gr8mexico
07-07-2009, 03:18 PM
I think if the Sox offered Aaron Poreda, Clayton Richards, Tyler Flowers and Josh Fields for Roy Halladay and Alexis Rios. I think the Blue Jays would take it. That deal would free up alot of money for the BlueJays.
With so much money coming off the books next year the Sox would be able to take in those 2 contracts.

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 03:19 PM
That is laughable - this is Roy Halladay we're talking about here, right?


You know what, sad thing is people actually believe this way.

You can get something for nothing.

It's comical.

Put the shoe on the other foot and we would be screaming murder if were offered that pile of crap for say a Mark Buehrle.

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 03:21 PM
I think if the Sox offered Aaron Poreda, Clayton Richards, Tyler Flowers and Josh Fields for Roy Halladay and Alexis Rios. I think the Blue Jays would take it. That deal would free up alot of money for the BlueJays.
With so much money coming off the books next year the Sox would be able to take in those 2 contracts.


Are you serious? :o:

MLB wold force the Jays to fold as a franchise if this were to happen.

That package is barely good enough to get the conversation started for Roy. And then you want them to throw in Rios?

TheVulture
07-07-2009, 03:22 PM
We'd still need to give up substantial high-end prospects to make that work, like I said in the rest of my post.

I don't think something like Richard, Fields, Poreda, Carter and Flowers would be laughable to Toronto.


Fields is worthless, though, especially for a team that has shown it values defense at 3b (Rolen, Glaus, Koskie being their last three at 3b). Richard is a borderline 5th starter. If anything, the three prospects would be the main part of the deal and I'd think they'd want at least one more that is ML ready or close to it. My opinion is the Sox would have to come up with a better infielder than Fields for the package, basically.

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 03:25 PM
I think Doc is the best pitcher in baseball, but he is a 32 year-old pitcher. An injury (look at Peavy) could derail the whole thing pretty quickly. We'd be terrible for years.


No we would not.

We have played without a farm system for the last 10-15 years and we have had the most successs in franchise history. Kenny would find a way to fill the gaps somehow.

You guys think way too highly of Minor League Prospects.

kittle42
07-07-2009, 03:26 PM
Ah, yes, the old "let's not give up anything of equal value, but instead throw 5 names of guys we don't even care about together...How can a team turn that down? 5 guys!!!"

southsideirish71
07-07-2009, 03:29 PM
No we would not.

We have played without a farm system for the last 10-15 years and we have had the most successs in franchise history. Kenny would find a way to fill the gaps somehow.

You guys think way too highly of Minor League Prospects.

Good minor league prospects could of had Miguel Cabrera a few years back, who has much more value than a pitcher who throws every 5 days I could care less who the pitcher is.

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 03:30 PM
Ah, yes, the old "let's not give up anything of equal value, but instead throw 5 names of guys we don't even care about together...How can a team turn that down? 5 guys!!!"



It's a joke.

Any conversation between the Sox and Jays starts with Roy and Beckham. It's the Sox call to decide to take the conversation further.

For the best starter in baseball (IMO), I would keep the conversation going. I know many here wouldn't, and that can be understood. But to counter with putting a list of half crappy ball players, that's insulting in all levels and it makes you look very dumb as a baseball fan.

Noneck
07-07-2009, 03:30 PM
You know what, sad thing is people actually believe this way.

You can get something for nothing.

It's comical.

Put the shoe on the other foot and we would be screaming murder if were offered that pile of crap for say a Mark Buehrle.


The sad part is that people listen to this propaganda put out there by Sox management. That the Sox are suddenly loaded with can't miss prospects. Then apply this bs toward getting the best pitcher in baseball. It doesn't work like that. Beckham is the one prospect that isn't hype and if you lose him for the best pitcher in baseball, so be it. You got to give to get.

getonbckthr
07-07-2009, 03:30 PM
I think if the Sox offered Aaron Poreda, Clayton Richards, Tyler Flowers and Josh Fields for Roy Halladay and Alexis Rios. I think the Blue Jays would take it. That deal would free up alot of money for the BlueJays.
With so much money coming off the books next year the Sox would be able to take in those 2 contracts.
Rios probably not. If we were to take back Vernon Wells Toronto would jump on that. However I dont see Jerry or Kenny willing to take on Wells and his albatross of a contract.

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 03:32 PM
Good minor league prospects could of had Miguel Cabrera a few years back, who has much more value than a pitcher who throws every 5 days I could care less who the pitcher is.


That's the key there.

Offering Fields & Richard as the key pieces of a package is a slap to the face to any team you are trying to deal with.

TheVulture
07-07-2009, 03:38 PM
Good minor league prospects could of had Miguel Cabrera a few years back, who has much more value than a pitcher who throws every 5 days I could care less who the pitcher is.

Not really. Cabrera will have 600-700 PA a year, a 240 inning pitcher will face 800-900 batters a year. A pitcher that can shut down an opponent can virtually single handedly win a game, a hitter cannot.

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 03:42 PM
This is starting to remind of Bear Fans up in arms when we gave up 2 #1 draft picks for Jay Cutler.


It's a once in a lifetime kind of move.

Paulwny
07-07-2009, 03:52 PM
That's the key there.

Offering Fields & Richard as the key pieces of a package is a slap to the face to any team you are trying to deal with.

Yep,
Ricciardi told the Canadian press, " If someone wants Roy and they're willing to blow us away, we'd be willing to listen...."

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 04:04 PM
Yep,
Ricciardi told the Canadian press, " If someone wants Roy and they're willing to blow us away, we'd be willing to listen...."


Is that what he said?

Paulwny
07-07-2009, 04:06 PM
Is that what he said?


http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Baseball/MLB/Toronto/2009/07/07/10052346-cp.html

34 Inch Stick
07-07-2009, 04:13 PM
Yep,
Ricciardi told the Canadian press, " If someone wants Roy and they're willing to blow us away, we'd be willing to listen...."

That really does not sound like a person who is all that available.

WhiteSox5187
07-07-2009, 04:15 PM
For what it's worth, I don't think Halladay is going anywhere and even if he does, I don't think it's the south side of Chicago unless he's pitching against us. But the only guys I wouldn't include in a deal to get him are: Danks, Floyd, Buerhle and Beckham. I'd be reluctant to part with Quentin, but I'm not so sure if he'll ever stay healthy, so. I'm surprised no one has mentioned Getz as being involved in this trade in anyway. Have we completely given up on him?

wulfy
07-07-2009, 04:17 PM
I'm surprised no one has mentioned Getz as being involved in this trade in anyway. Have we completely given up on him?


I just don't think that it's perceived that Getz has a lot of value on the trade market, plus they are loaded at 2B.

Paulwny
07-07-2009, 04:19 PM
That really does not sound like a person who is all that available.

According to Ricciardi, he's not shopping Halladay ( him calling GM's) , but is willing to hear offers ( GM's calling him).

Noneck
07-07-2009, 04:20 PM
I'm surprised no one has mentioned Getz as being involved in this trade in anyway. Have we completely given up on him?

You are kidding right? We are talking about the best pitcher in baseball and you are mentioning Getz?

WisSoxFan
07-07-2009, 04:26 PM
You are kidding right? We are talking about the best pitcher in baseball and you are mentioning Getz?


Fields and Richard continue to get mentioned so I see nothing wrong with throwing Getz's name around too.

How about Ramirez, Poreda and Jordan Danks? Would that get a conversation started?

DickAllen72
07-07-2009, 04:26 PM
I'd offer Poreda, Richard, Flowers, Allen, Hudson and Fields for Halliday and Rolen.

asindc
07-07-2009, 04:27 PM
Fields and Richard continue to get mentioned so I see nothing wrong with throwing Getz's name around too.

How about Ramirez, Poreda and Jordan Danks? Would that get a conversation started?

I think he thought you meant Getz for Halladay straight up.

Noneck
07-07-2009, 04:29 PM
Fields and Richard continue to get mentioned so I see nothing wrong with throwing Getz's name around too.

How about Ramirez, Poreda and Jordan Danks? Would that get a conversation started?
Yea I guess so, as long the list starts with Beckham, Getz and all the above can be mentioned.

WisSoxFan
07-07-2009, 04:30 PM
I think he thought you meant Getz for Halladay straight up.

Now that is laughable...:o:

BadBobbyJenks
07-07-2009, 04:34 PM
People would trade Beckham for Halladay. This is astonishing.

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 04:35 PM
Fields and Richard continue to get mentioned so I see nothing wrong with throwing Getz's name around too.

How about Ramirez, Poreda and Jordan Danks? Would that get a conversation started?


I think that's the best one I have seen yet which did not include Beckham.

Good job being realistic.

theoakwoody
07-07-2009, 04:51 PM
At 32 years old I still think Halladay will be dominant for 2 to 3 years and probably pitch till he's 38. He's a free agent after next year and already makes about 14-15 million. I think with the money coming off our books next year it would be a great investment even if we resign him at little bit more than he makes now. If our rotation was Halladay, Buerhle, Floyd, Danks, and Poreda in '10 I think we would be doing pretty well for ourselves and we would only have $33 million invested in our starters. Next year Contreras is gone ($ 10 million) as well as Dotel ($ 6 million) and probably Thome ($ 13 million) unless he signs for less to stay. Hopefully Dye will be back as well but it will cost us $ 12 million. The White Sox should be major players in free agency but if they could get their man now maybe they could lock up Halladay before he gets to free agency. Hey somebody had to start a Peavy, woops, Halladay thread right?

Looking at the free agent 2b and cf coming up in 2010 I would rather invest in pitching and stick with the kids and resign pods.

Shortstops
Orlando Cabrera (35)
Alex Cora (34)
Craig Counsell (39)
Bobby Crosby (30)
Adam Everett (33)
Chris Gomez (39)
Alex Gonzalez (32) - $6MM mutual option with a $500K buyout
Khalil Greene (30)
Jerry Hairston Jr. (34)
John McDonald (35)
Marco Scutaro (34)
Miguel Tejada (36)
Omar Vizquel (43)
Jack Wilson (32) - $8.4MM club option with a $600K buyout

Center fielders
Rick Ankiel (30)
Rocco Baldelli (28)
Marlon Byrd (32)
Mike Cameron (37)
Endy Chavez (32)
Coco Crisp (30) - $8MM club option with a $500K buyout
Darin Erstad (36)
Ryan Freel (34)
Jerry Hairston Jr. (34)
Reed Johnson (33)
Andruw Jones (33)
Gabe Kapler (34)
Mark Kotsay (34)
Corey Patterson (30)
Scott Podsednik (34)

kittle42
07-07-2009, 05:03 PM
People would trade Beckham for Halladay. This is astonishing.

I think it's an interesting conversation. Our top young player for perhaps the best pitcher in baseball.

31335
07-07-2009, 05:09 PM
If our rotation was Halladay, Buerhle, Floyd, Danks, and Poreda in '10 I think we would be doing pretty well for ourselves and we would only have $33 million invested in our starters.



IF Kenny was to go after Roy Halladay I would think that Poreda would be a piece in the deal

BadBobbyJenks
07-07-2009, 05:12 PM
I think it's an interesting conversation. Our top young player for perhaps the best pitcher in baseball.


If he was signed to the same length of a Peavy deal, I would entertain the idea. This is a year and a half of Halladay for the future of the franchise.

LoveYourSuit
07-07-2009, 05:32 PM
If he was signed to the same length of a Peavy deal, I would entertain the idea. This is a year and a half of Halladay for the future of the franchise.


So which is it?

People were upset at the Peavy deal because too long of a commitment and too much money.

Roy has less money owed to him and a short commitment.

DirtySox
07-07-2009, 05:35 PM
People shouldn't have been upset about the Peavy deal. It looked like it was going to be highway robbery with Poreda and Richard headlining the return. The offer the Braves had through the winter meetings was much better.

I'm not for pillaging the farm/prospects for 1.5 years of Halladay when the current team isn't all that strong to begin with, and plenty of additional holes to fill in the coming offseasons. Kenny should stand pat as is.

Edit: And for the record I think if he is indeed dealt, that the Phillies will pony up for him.

russ99
07-07-2009, 05:47 PM
Ah, yes, the old "let's not give up anything of equal value, but instead throw 5 names of guys we don't even care about together...How can a team turn that down? 5 guys!!!"

First off, Halladay isn't the best pitcher in baseball, despite his record this year. But I'd put him in the top 10%.

Secondly, Toronto is selling him to cut payroll regardless of the face they're putting on it. By selling him a year ahead, they're trying to maximize the return they get for him. Look at the return for Sabathia last year. That would be a good indicator as to what we'd need to give up with slightly more for the extra year.

They may ask for Beckham, but Kenny would laugh in their face. However, the Sox do have good prospects that they could send to Toronto in a deal, so it's not "5 guys we don't care about".

Craig Grebeck
07-07-2009, 05:48 PM
First off, Halladay isn't the best pitcher in baseball, despite his record this year. But I'd put him in the top 10%.

Secondly, Toronto is selling him to cut payroll regardless of the face they're putting on it. By selling him a year ahead, they're trying to maximize the return they get for him. Look at the return for Sabathia last year. That would be a good indicator as to what we'd need to give up (and probably slightly more for the extra year)

They may ask for Beckham, but Kenny would laugh in their face. However, the Sox do have good prospects that they could send to Toronto in a deal, so it's not "5 guys we don't care about".
Top 15? Really? I'd say top 1%.

BadBobbyJenks
07-07-2009, 05:57 PM
So which is it?

People were upset at the Peavy deal because too long of a commitment and too much money.

Roy has less money owed to him and a short commitment.

I was not upset about the length of the Peavy deal and I think anyone who was against that trade was foolish or lying to themselves because it did not get done.

I would trade anything in the farm to get Halladay except for Beckham.

BadBobbyJenks
07-07-2009, 05:58 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?context=podcast&id=4311515

Scroll in about 5 minutes when Gammons is on. He says he will be absolutely floored if KW doesn't make a serious run at Halladay.

Noneck
07-07-2009, 06:20 PM
First off, Halladay isn't the best pitcher in baseball, despite his record this year. But I'd put him in the top 10%.




OK Ill bite. There are 30 teams with 5 starters each, That's 150 starting pitchers. You say Halladay is in the top 10% so there are possibly 15 starting pitchers better than him? I would love to know these 15 or even 10. Come to think about it maybe even 5.

DSpivack
07-07-2009, 06:24 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?context=podcast&id=4311515

Scroll in about 5 minutes when Gammons is on. He says he will be absolutely floored if KW doesn't make a serious run at Halladay.

Gammons saying he's happy to be in one of his favorite places around, Giancreco saying "Wrigley and Fenway?" and Gammons coming back talking about the White Sox was hilarious. Then Giangreco proceeds to ask him again about the Cubs. What a joke that guy is.

I've always liked Peter Gammons.

WhiteSox5187
07-07-2009, 06:33 PM
You are kidding right? We are talking about the best pitcher in baseball and you are mentioning Getz?

I'm not talking about Getz for Halladay straight up, but I'm saying he hasn't been mentioned in any deal at all and i wonder why that is.

JermaineDye05
07-07-2009, 06:48 PM
I wouldn't trade Beckham because I think his offense is good enough to overlook some of his defensive miscues, where as Fields offense is almost non existent. Roy Halladay doesn't do much for the Sox if they can't catch the ball behind him. I'd love to have him but I'd love to get him without giving up Mr. Beckham, I'm sure if Kenny's planning on offering something that Gordon will not be included. As far as we know he wasn't included in the Jake Peavy deal.

Tragg
07-07-2009, 06:50 PM
People shouldn't have been upset about the Peavy deal. It looked like it was going to be highway robbery with Poreda and Richard headlining the return. The offer the Braves had through the winter meetings was much better.

I'm not for pillaging the farm/prospects for 1.5 years of Halladay when the current team isn't all that strong to begin with, and plenty of additional holes to fill in the coming offseasons. Kenny should stand pat as is.

I agree 100%.
And honestly, right now, is our team better than the Jays without Halladay? Not much if at all.
So if we add Halladay, are we a WS contender? No.

We're going to contend for a while. Don't trade it all away for 1.5 years of Halladay and make the Blue Jays the next Rangers.

stacksedwards
07-07-2009, 06:59 PM
If its partially a salary dump is there anyway we could include Jim Thome in the deal? The expiring contract is attractive and it may soften the PR hit the Jays would take from trading their best player. Poreda, Richard, Thome (with the Sox picking up the rest of this year) and another pitching prospect. Maybe that gets it done. While this takes a left handed bat out of the line up it solves the outfield problem when TCQ comes back.

DSpivack
07-07-2009, 07:18 PM
If its partially a salary dump is there anyway we could include Jim Thome in the deal? The expiring contract is attractive and it may soften the PR hit the Jays would take from trading their best player. Poreda, Richard, Thome (with the Sox picking up the rest of this year) and another pitching prospect. Maybe that gets it done. While this takes a left handed bat out of the line up it solves the outfield problem when TCQ comes back.

The Jays would want young, good, cheap players back. If they wanted to pay an expensive older player, they'd keep Halladay.

Domeshot17
07-07-2009, 07:25 PM
This isn't the NBA, expiring contracts mean nothing.

I imagine it would take a Poreda-Richard-Flowers-Allen package.

One Idea I would love to see us look at but I know it will NEVER happen is getting Halladay cheap by picking up Wells. If we can get him for 12 mil a season for his remainder in order to pick up halladay, it would be worth it. He would bring some consistency to the CF position, not great, but I imagine we could see 265-30-90 out of him at the cell with great D.

thedudeabides
07-07-2009, 07:57 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?context=podcast&id=4311515

Scroll in about 5 minutes when Gammons is on. He says he will be absolutely floored if KW doesn't make a serious run at Halladay.

You know Kenny will inquire about him, I guess it just boils down to how bad the Jays really want to trade him. It sounds like their motivation to move him is they can't afford to resign him once he hits free agency. The Wells and Rios contracts are holding them down. They can also wait until the offseason to see if they can move another contract, if not it's time to shop him a little more aggressively.

They hold the cards right now, they aren't backed into a corner like the Padres are with Peavy.

I know it's fun to speculate on a package that could get it done, and I'm sure the Sox could put together a competitive package, but keep in mind that each teams needs are different, and every team evaluates prospects differently. The Blue Jays have a lot of good young pitching and a logjam in the outfield. From the looks of their system, they need help on the left side of their infield and maybe first base. But, most teams will take pitching and catchers regardless of their depth. Richard and Poreda were attractive for the Padres, but Toronto may not view them the same. I'm pretty sure the Sox wouldn't deal Beckham, and I'd imagine any package would probably revolve around Flowers.

It should be fun to see how this plays out, but it may not be as big a package as some think. There just may not be enough teams that have the financial flexability, and they may not want to trade him in their own division. If that's the case you eliminate the two richest teams in baseball.

Frater Perdurabo
07-07-2009, 08:12 PM
Well you can count out Allen as part of a possible package. As reported by Ranger during the pregame, the Sox just dealt Allen to get Arizona's underrated relief pitcher, Tony Pena.

DSpivack
07-07-2009, 08:13 PM
This isn't the NBA, expiring contracts mean nothing.

I imagine it would take a Poreda-Richard-Flowers-Allen package.

One Idea I would love to see us look at but I know it will NEVER happen is getting Halladay cheap by picking up Wells. If we can get him for 12 mil a season for his remainder in order to pick up halladay, it would be worth it. He would bring some consistency to the CF position, not great, but I imagine we could see 265-30-90 out of him at the cell with great D.

Well, so much for Brandon Allen. Maybe the Jays are high on Tony Pena?

GregO23
07-07-2009, 08:39 PM
A package that includes Jenks make sense? Or is that stupid on the Jays part because of how much they have invested in Ryan, and also wanting to cut payroll

pmck003
07-07-2009, 08:53 PM
Someone mentioned something similar to this earlier:

Would you be happy trading Burls for Beckham?

I wouldn't be happy with that, so if the Sox think they can sign Doc for a few more years I think you gotta consider trading Beckham. Sure there's risk in that Beckham could explode into an all-star who is young and cheap, or maybe he just had a good 12-21 spurt. Would you be against this if Beckham was still 3-31?

Doc has been very durable and most likely makes the rotation comparable with any team for the next 4-5 years though. If I was Ricciardi I would keep Doc or wait for a better package than Doc for Beckham w/ junkola. Beckham w/ another good prospect would get me thinking. I think Ricciardi would have to consider Ramirez w/ another good prospect too.

munchman33
07-07-2009, 10:18 PM
I think Kenny pretty much ended this speculation today when he said we can't add salary due to low attendance.

soxfanreggie
07-07-2009, 10:32 PM
Wouldn't adding him increase attendance? You have to think that attendance would spike on days he pitches, as long as more people come out if we win more games.

Rocky Soprano
07-07-2009, 10:33 PM
I think Kenny pretty much ended this speculation today when he said we can't add salary due to low attendance.

Care to show where he said he can't?
Because that's not what the ESPN article says.

DirtySox
07-07-2009, 10:33 PM
Care to show where he said he can't?
Because that's not what the ESPN article says.

Edit: Oops, didn't read the article at length.

Frater Perdurabo
07-07-2009, 10:35 PM
With Thome, Contreras and Dotel's deal's expiring, KW ought to be able to convince JR to cough up a little extra this year knowing that more would be saved next year by dropping those three while adding Halladay. I think the money argument is a smokescreen.

Noneck
07-07-2009, 10:40 PM
I think Kenny pretty much ended this speculation today when he said we can't add salary due to low attendance.

It really wouldn't cost that much to get Halladay. They would have to pick up only 2 1/2 months of his salary this year. Then next year, dump Thome, Contreras and Dotel which would more than make up Halladays salary. If they decide or if Dye doesn't want to stay, then they have more money. Sounds like all bs to me from management.

DSpivack
07-07-2009, 11:26 PM
It really wouldn't cost that much to get Halladay. They would have to pick up only 2 1/2 months of his salary this year. Then next year, dump Thome, Contreras and Dotel which would more than make up Halladays salary. If they decide or if Dye doesn't want to stay, then they have more money. Sounds like all bs to me from management.

That revenue has dropped I don't think is BS.

That KW is posturing and staying 'under the radar' is also a possibility.

munchman33
07-07-2009, 11:30 PM
Care to show where he said he can't?
Because that's not what the ESPN article says.

"Well, if I'm being completely honest money is more of the issue now. We expected a little more support than we've gotten,"

munchman33
07-07-2009, 11:33 PM
It really wouldn't cost that much to get Halladay. They would have to pick up only 2 1/2 months of his salary this year. Then next year, dump Thome, Contreras and Dotel which would more than make up Halladays salary. If they decide or if Dye doesn't want to stay, then they have more money. Sounds like all bs to me from management.

Attendance is down 15% from last year. They're probably bleeding red. I'd be less surprised to see Kenny just try to dump Thome or Dye to get out of the red than I would for him to pickup a salary.

DSpivack
07-07-2009, 11:35 PM
"Well, if I'm being completely honest money is more of the issue now. We expected a little more support than we've gotten,"

Attendance is down 15% from last year. They're probably bleeding red. I'd be less surprised to see Kenny just try to dump Thome or Dye to get out of the red than I would for him to pickup a salary.

All I see him saying is that revenue is down, not that the team is in the red, which you seem to be assuming. With all the money coming off the books after this season, I don't see a potential deal being hampered all that much.

Rocky Soprano
07-07-2009, 11:38 PM
"Well, if I'm being completely honest money is more of the issue now. We expected a little more support than we've gotten,"

I still don't see where he says he can't.

EuroSox35
07-07-2009, 11:39 PM
Halladay would not make us a sure thing to the World Series, I'm not even sure it'd put us over the top to take the division, too many other holes, and because of that I wouldn't mortgage the future for him. I'm not trying to sell him short, I'd take him over Peavy or any of our starters in a second, but you have to look at it deeper than that.

DSpivack
07-07-2009, 11:43 PM
Halladay would not make us a sure thing to the World Series, I'm not even sure it'd put us over the top to take the division, too many other holes, and because of that I wouldn't mortgage the future for him. I'm not trying to sell him short, I'd take him over Peavy or any of our starters in a second, but you have to look at it deeper than that.

I would trade any package of a few minor leaguers, and some on the MLB squad if they wanted them [Fields, BA, Richard, Poreda, Getz, Ramirez]. He's more of a sure thing for the next few years than any youngster is. Halladay is a bonafide ace, a true anchor. I would love it if we were able to acquire him.

mzh
07-08-2009, 12:37 AM
Looking at the current position of the White Sox and the current numbers of Roy Halladay, this would remind me somewhat of a deadline deal made in 2002 by the Montreal Expos involving a pitcher named Bartolo Colon. On this day in 2002, they were 46-41, similar to us, and despite being 9.5 games back of the division, they were only 5 back of the wild card. They traded for Colon, who was 10-4 at the time. Colon finished the season great, he also went 10-4 for Montreal, but they still finished 83-79, a full 12.5 back of the wild card. The main pieces that went to Cleveland in exchange for a half year rental of Colon? Two young minor leaguers named Cliff Lee and Grady Sizemore. Be cautious.

The Immigrant
07-08-2009, 01:00 AM
Looking at the current position of the White Sox and the current numbers of Roy Halladay, this would remind me somewhat of a deadline deal made in 2002 by the Montreal Expos involving a pitcher named Bartolo Colon. On this day in 2002, they were 46-41, similar to us, and despite being 9.5 games back of the division, they were only 5 back of the wild card. They traded for Colon, who was 10-4 at the time. Colon finished the season great, he also went 10-4 for Montreal, but they still finished 83-79, a full 12.5 back of the wild card. The main pieces that went to Cleveland in exchange for a half year rental of Colon? Two young minor leaguers named Cliff Lee and Grady Sizemore. Be cautious.

Don't forget Brandon Phillips.

That deal is an anomaly because Omar Minaya was under the impression the team would be contracted. He could give two ****s about the future.

Lip Man 1
07-08-2009, 02:11 AM
Ozzie's saying it's not going to happen. Sox don't have the prospects and payroll could be an issue.

Lip

doublem23
07-08-2009, 02:18 AM
Ozzie's saying it's not going to happen. Sox don't have the prospects and payroll could be an issue.

Lip

Ozzie doesn't make the deals and this is a team that literally a handful of weeks ago was willing to take on Jake Peavy's larger, longer contract, so right now, I don't think anybody knows what the hell is going on.

Noneck
07-08-2009, 02:20 AM
Ozzie's saying it's not going to happen. Sox don't have the prospects and payroll could be an issue.

Lip

I'll accept the fact they don't have what Toronto wants in the way of prospects but having a payroll issue is crap.

Gammons Peter
07-08-2009, 09:35 AM
I would trade any package of a few minor leaguers, and some on the MLB squad if they wanted them [Fields, BA, Richard, Poreda, Getz, Ramirez]. He's more of a sure thing for the next few years than any youngster is. Halladay is a bonafide ace, a true anchor. I would love it if we were able to acquire him.

combining garbage does not make it more attractive

SOXPHILE
07-08-2009, 09:57 AM
Don't worry. He's going to the Cubs. According to the brilliant Cub fans I've heard heard on the radio, the Cubs will be able to trade Jake Fox for him, straight up. Yes, that's right, a career minor leaguer, for Roy Halladay. I'm sure the Blue Jays will jump all over that.

soxpride724
07-08-2009, 10:35 AM
Don't worry. He's going to the Cubs. According to the brilliant Cub fans I've heard heard on the radio, the Cubs will be able to trade Jake Fox for him, straight up. Yes, that's right, a career minor leaguer, for Roy Halladay. I'm sure the Blue Jays will jump all over that.

Yeah, on The Score this morning, I heard Vitters for DOC...... straight up,lol.

Hey, I think a LOW A ball player for a MLB proven stud is an even exchange. I mean geez, this guy is tearing up the Beloit Snappers and the Kane County Cougars.

DSpivack
07-08-2009, 10:50 AM
combining garbage does not make it more attractive

Yeah, that wasn't so much a proposed deal as me dreaming. :tongue:

Gammons Peter
07-08-2009, 11:01 AM
Yeah, that wasn't so much a proposed deal as me dreaming. :tongue:

but if you throw in Wise......

russ99
07-08-2009, 11:18 AM
Attendance is down 15% from last year. They're probably bleeding red. I'd be less surprised to see Kenny just try to dump Thome or Dye to get out of the red than I would for him to pickup a salary.

Payroll is down 20% from last year. Coincidence? They're not in the red.

thedudeabides
07-08-2009, 03:00 PM
Joel Sherman of the NY Post interviewed Ricciardi, regarding Halladay. A lot of good info:

Link (http://blogs.nypost.com/sports/st/archives/2009/07/ricciardi_on_ha.html)

He said they would like to keep him out of the AL East. It also sounds like this could take a while, as they are feeling out interest and then will send scouts to evaluate the best prospects. Halladay sounds willing to waive his no trade clause, but gave a long list of places he would prefer not to go. He would not comment an which teams were on the list.

The primary target sounds like a shortstop, but they will take the best prospects.

It sounds like this won't be settled quickly, and there will be a lot of rumors swirling around.

mantis1212
07-08-2009, 03:26 PM
Joel Sherman of the NY Post interviewed Ricciardi, regarding Halladay. A lot of good info:

Link (http://blogs.nypost.com/sports/st/archives/2009/07/ricciardi_on_ha.html)

He said they would like to keep him out of the AL East. It also sounds like this could take a while, as they are feeling out interest and then will send scouts to evaluate the best prospects. Halladay sounds willing to waive his no trade clause, but gave a long list of places he would prefer not to go. He would not comment an which teams were on the list.

The primary target sounds like a shortstop, but they will take the best prospects.

It sounds like this won't be settled quickly, and there will be a lot of rumors swirling around.

Trying to put together a more realistic deal- how about Ramirez, Richard, Poreda? That's 3 players currently contributing to a major league roster, giving them the shortstop they're looking for along with young pitching, making no money.
You can throw in a couple minor leaguers and I think the deal is reasonable. Move Beckham over to SS and either Fields or preferable Nix (IMO) to 3B.

Taliesinrk
07-08-2009, 04:19 PM
Trying to put together a more realistic deal- how about Ramirez, Richard, Poreda? That's 3 players currently contributing to a major league roster, giving them the shortstop they're looking for along with young pitching, making no money.
You can throw in a couple minor leaguers and I think the deal is reasonable. Move Beckham over to SS and either Fields or preferable Nix (IMO) to 3B.

I agree that this proposal makes sense (if that's what the Blue Jays are looking for), but if Riccardi is smart (insert comment here), the conversation will begin and end with Beckham. I think the Jays would be fools to take Ramirez is a player like Beckham is available.

mantis1212
07-08-2009, 04:23 PM
I agree that this proposal makes sense (if that's what the Blue Jays are looking for), but if Riccardi is smart (insert comment here), the conversation will begin and end with Beckham. I think the Jays would be fools to take Ramirez is a player like Beckham is available.

That's the thing, my estimation is Beckham is not available, not for a year-an-a-half rental. If Halladay was signed for 3-4 years, that would be one thing, but we have to remember he could walk after 2010, and all the GMs know that.

asindc
07-08-2009, 04:26 PM
I agree that this proposal makes sense (if that's what the Blue Jays are looking for), but if Riccardi is smart (insert comment here), the conversation will begin and end with Beckham. I think the Jays would be fools to take Ramirez is a player like Beckham is available.

I have a hard time envisioning any team giving up a young player of his caliber for a 1.5 yrs. rental.

thedudeabides
07-08-2009, 04:49 PM
Jon Heyman of SI weighs in on Halladay. He is also saying the Jays do not want to trade him to an AL East team, and would prefer to send him to the NL. The Phillies may be early favorites. There is a list of possible suitors, and the White Sox are on the list. A source says that Beckham is untouchable, and the Sox weren't willing to trade him for Peavy straight up.

Heyman (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/jon_heyman/07/08/halladay.trade/index.html)

mzh
07-08-2009, 08:29 PM
I agree that this proposal makes sense (if that's what the Blue Jays are looking for), but if Riccardi is smart (insert comment here), the conversation will begin and end with Beckham. I think the Jays would be fools to take Ramirez is a player like Beckham is available.
Available as in currently playing in Major League Baseball or available as in someone who might be realistically part of a trade?

DSpivack
07-09-2009, 12:05 AM
I have a hard time envisioning any team giving up a young player of his caliber for a 1.5 yrs. rental.

Well, Matt LaPorta is no Beckham, but Milwaukee did trade him away for a few months of Sabathia.

PalehosePlanet
07-09-2009, 12:59 PM
The sad part is that people listen to this propaganda put out there by Sox management. That the Sox are suddenly loaded with can't miss prospects. Then apply this bs toward getting the best pitcher in baseball. It doesn't work like that. Beckham is the one prospect that isn't hype and if you lose him for the best pitcher in baseball, so be it. You got to give to get.

Put out there by Sox management?

We worked our way up from 28 to 16 in Baseball America's farm rankings from the start of '08 to the start of '09. BA has already mentioned that we are a system on the upswing and that we will be climbing higher next year (possibly top 12? top 10?)

How is this Sox management propoganda? These are national free lance scouts/writers that are grading our players, not KW or Rick Hahn or JR.

I think if our system made it into the top 5 people around here would still be lost in 2007 and whine about how our farm system sucks.

As far as Halladay and/or Rios go: Toronto apparently IS in a cost dumping mode right now.

And for those of you who think that the Jays do not need pitching, keep in mind that Marcum, McGowan and Litsch all had major surgery this year. There is a good chance that some or all of these guys never rebound to what they were (which is not that great in the first place.)

Make them a reasonable offer, if they they decline, **** 'em, let them eat the contracts, and move on.

fox23
07-09-2009, 02:12 PM
Well, Matt LaPorta is no Beckham, but Milwaukee did trade him away for a few months of Sabathia.

Yeah, but that was their first realistic chance to make the playoffs since when, 1982? A small market team only has so many chances and they had to pull out all the stops when they had the opportunity. They also thought they were going to get 4 first round picks when him and Sheets left after the season.

DickAllen72
07-09-2009, 07:50 PM
Trying to put together a more realistic deal- how about Ramirez, Richard, Poreda? That's 3 players currently contributing to a major league roster, giving them the shortstop they're looking for along with young pitching, making no money.
You can throw in a couple minor leaguers and I think the deal is reasonable. Move Beckham over to SS and either Fields or preferable Nix (IMO) to 3B.
Ramirez, Poreda, Flowers and either Richard or Hudson for Halliday and Scott Rolen. The Jays save a lot of salary by shedding Halliday and Rolen and get the prospects they need.

Rolen starts at third and Beckham moves to short. Sox also wind up with one of the best pitching staffs (starters and pen) in baseball.

mzh
07-10-2009, 04:37 PM
Ramirez, Poreda, Flowers and either Richard or Hudson for Halliday and Scott Rolen. The Jays save a lot of salary by shedding Halliday and Rolen and get the prospects they need.

Rolen starts at third and Beckham moves to short. Sox also wind up with one of the best pitching staffs (starters and pen) in baseball.

How much and for how long is Rolen's contract? I'm not too eager to shell out the farm system for a couple years of Halladay and Rolen.

jabrch
07-10-2009, 07:02 PM
How much and for how long is Rolen's contract? I'm not too eager to shell out the farm system for a couple years of Halladay and Rolen.

11mm for 09 and 11mm for 10 with full NTC.

mzh
07-10-2009, 11:32 PM
11mm for 09 and 11mm for 10 with full NTC.

Exactly. If KW or anybody is going to give up a huge package, as in Ramirez, Poreda, Flowers and either Richard or Hudson for a year and a half for these 2 guys, they had better believe hard that we will win championship's two years in a row (IMO).

wassagstdu
07-11-2009, 09:54 AM
I think it's an interesting conversation. Our top young player for perhaps the best pitcher in baseball.

Can we arrange it so we get Beckham back when Halladay walks? Maybe 15 years of Beckham for 1.5 of Halladay? Maybe 7 prime years vs 1.5? Hmmm. Closer than I thought. Extend Halladay for a year and it's a deal.

Tragg
07-11-2009, 09:55 AM
The Mets trade for Santana would be comparable.
Check out what they gave up - 4 prospects, only one of whom could be considered elite (and that's questionable).
The Jays have a decent roster - how many playoff appearances?

oeo
07-11-2009, 12:04 PM
I agree that this proposal makes sense (if that's what the Blue Jays are looking for), but if Riccardi is smart (insert comment here), the conversation will begin and end with Beckham. I think the Jays would be fools to take Ramirez is a player like Beckham is available.

That's not being smart, it's dreaming. Beckham is not available, nor should he be.

Lip Man 1
07-11-2009, 12:18 PM
Phil Rogers has a story at the Tribune web site where he says the Sox do have the prospects to make a deal with Toronto.

Lip

soltrain21
07-11-2009, 12:27 PM
That's not being smart, it's dreaming. Beckham is not available, nor should he be.

How do you know?

Domeshot17
07-11-2009, 12:35 PM
The big thing to consider is, does Halladay make us a World Series contender? You don't make this trade, and give up a huge ransom, if he can't win you a title in the next 2 years.

Currently, the White Sox are in the bottom half of the American League in EVERY major offensive category except Home Runs. Halladay does not change that. The only teams with less RBI than us are Oakland Seattle and KC.

Picking up Halladay means we need to pick up a hitter as well.

Frater Perdurabo
07-11-2009, 12:48 PM
Picking up Halladay means we need to pick up a hitter as well.

What if you can get both Halladay and Vernon Wells? They are said to want to dump his salary.

We've got Thome, Dye and Contreras coming off the books next year. Konerko's deal is done after 2010.

The Jays might take less in return if the Sox are willing to take on both Halladay's and Wells' contracts.

Fields (who might benefit from Gene Tenace) for Halladay and Wells?

:bandance:

Domeshot17
07-11-2009, 12:56 PM
What if you can get both Halladay and Vernon Wells? They are said to want to dump his salary.

We've got Thome, Dye and Contreras coming off the books next year. Konerko's deal is done after 2010.

The Jays might take less in return if the Sox are willing to take on both Halladay's and Wells' contracts.

Fields (who might benefit from Gene Tenace) for Halladay and Wells?

:bandance:


I said earlier in this thread I believe I would be in favor of just that. Wells would answer our CF spot for a long time, basically it would give a guy like Mitchell a ton of time to develop. See if Toronto will eat 6-7 million dollars a year, get Wells around 12-14 mil a season, Get Halladay. It would make a lot of sense to me.

wsf4l
07-11-2009, 02:01 PM
Internet says that Alexei or Beckham must be included in a deal for Halladay

soltrain21
07-11-2009, 02:12 PM
Internet says that Alexei or Beckham must be included in a deal for Halladay

I'd trade Alexei in a heartbeat. What would it take? Alexei, Flowers and ...?

pmck003
07-11-2009, 02:36 PM
I just posted the same thing in another thread, but I just don't get why everyone seems so eager to give up Alexei over Beckham. Yea I think everyone was expecting more from Alexei in the first half (including defensively), and I think Beckham could be very good. Alexei isn't a geezer though. Sox management seems to think Beckham is more valuable too so I'm saying this more as a question than an argument.

Edit: I don't have scouting skills; what makes Beckham the next Miguel Cabrera?

wsf4l
07-11-2009, 03:24 PM
I just posted the same thing in another thread, but I just don't get why everyone seems so eager to give up Alexei over Beckham. Yea I think everyone was expecting more from Alexei in the first half (including defensively), and I think Beckham could be very good. Alexei isn't a geezer though. Sox management seems to think Beckham is more valuable too so I'm saying this more as a question than an argument.

Edit: I don't have scouting skills; what makes Beckham the next Miguel Cabrera?

I totally agree with you. I don't agree with people saying that Beckham has to be left out of a deal acquiring a superstar. You don't know that Beckham will be a sure thing (although he probably will be). At his career peek Beckham will hit .300 with 20 HR and maybe 100 RBI. I read on another thread or maybe another site that they wouldn't include Beckham to get Pujols or Lincecum. So people overvalue Beckham, and we know he is probably gonna be a good player but he is no Pujols or Lincecum.

mantis1212
07-11-2009, 03:39 PM
Phil Rogers has a story at the Tribune web site where he says the Sox do have the prospects to make a deal with Toronto.

Lip

It's strange how Rogers says Alexei is untouchable yet he would trade Floyd. I think Alexei, Richard, Poreda is a reasonable deal for Halladay and Wells if they truly want to dump the salary.

JB98
07-11-2009, 03:43 PM
The big thing to consider is, does Halladay make us a World Series contender? You don't make this trade, and give up a huge ransom, if he can't win you a title in the next 2 years.

Currently, the White Sox are in the bottom half of the American League in EVERY major offensive category except Home Runs. Halladay does not change that. The only teams with less RBI than us are Oakland Seattle and KC.

Picking up Halladay means we need to pick up a hitter as well.

No, and that's why I wouldn't make the deal.

Halladay doesn't change our hot-and-cold offense, nor does he change our subpar infield defense.

WhiteSox1989
07-11-2009, 04:45 PM
I would not be willing to give up Beckham.


Alexei would honestly make the most sense. But I don't see KW trading him.

SBSoxFan
07-11-2009, 10:59 PM
What if you can get both Halladay and Vernon Wells? They are said to want to dump his salary.

I think I heard on 670 the Score Friday that the Jays said anyone who wants Halladay must take Wells or Rios as well.

Edit: I remember it now; it was just this morning. :redneck Rosenbloom was on with someone, and they said a very knowledgeable baseball writer in Toronto (I don't remember his name) wrote an article stating what a mess Toronto's finances were, and that Wells or Rios must come with Halladay.

pearso66
07-11-2009, 11:04 PM
It's strange how Rogers says Alexei is untouchable yet he would trade Floyd. I think Alexei, Richard, Poreda is a reasonable deal for Halladay and Wells if they truly want to dump the salary.

I wouldn't trade Floyd, Danks or Buehrle in a deal for Halladay. How many more wins would he give the Sox over any of those guys? Maybe 2-3? Plus it still leaves the Sox with a hole in the 5 spot in the rotation, especially if Richard and/or Poreda are included. They were talking today about trading Floyd, and I wouldn't do that unless they got a major haul for him. The only guy in our top 4 I would trade would be Contreras because I don't see him keeping this up the rest of the year.

Noneck
07-11-2009, 11:07 PM
I think I heard on 670 the Score Friday that the Jays said anyone who wants Halladay must take Wells or Rios as well.

Edit: I remember it now; it was just this morning. :redneck Rosenbloom was on with someone, and they said a very knowledgeable baseball writer in Toronto (I don't remember his name) wrote an article stating what a mess Toronto's finances were, and that Wells or Rios must come with Halladay.
If that is the case, that will drastically reduce the quality of players in return and essentially put the Sox out of the running.

jabrch
07-11-2009, 11:42 PM
Phil Rogers has a story at the Tribune web site where he says the Sox do have the prospects to make a deal with Toronto.

Lip

How much respect do you have for Rogers' ramblings?

jabrch
07-11-2009, 11:46 PM
I think I heard on 670 the Score Friday that the Jays said anyone who wants Halladay must take Wells or Rios as well.

Edit: I remember it now; it was just this morning. :redneck Rosenbloom was on with someone, and they said a very knowledgeable baseball writer in Toronto (I don't remember his name) wrote an article stating what a mess Toronto's finances were, and that Wells or Rios must come with Halladay.

If that's the case, they have very little leverage to demand a Beckham level prospect + 3 more. In fact, if they are making someone take a 65mm (Rios) or 100mm (Wells) liability, they will be lucky to get much at all for him.

oeo
07-12-2009, 12:07 AM
How do you know?

Considering they wouldn't trade him for Peavy straight up...

He's going to be a star, he's staying.

jabrch
07-12-2009, 12:30 AM
Considering they wouldn't trade him for Peavy straight up...

He's going to be a star, he's staying.

On BBTN, Olney just said the Sox will not trade Gordon Beckham in a deal for Halladay. I don't put much credence in what Buster says - but I don't doubt this is true. Surely if they are demanding someone take Rios, they don't have a chance of getting a guy like Gordon.

A. Cavatica
07-12-2009, 01:25 AM
If they are insisting that someone take Wells or Rios, their market is down to the handful of teams with unlimited resources. Even worse for Toronto, the usual suspects (NY and Boston) are in their division, and will not overpay unless they think the other is about to get him.

Who else has that kind of cash?

Brian26
07-12-2009, 11:05 AM
I totally agree with you. I don't agree with people saying that Beckham has to be left out of a deal acquiring a superstar. You don't know that Beckham will be a sure thing (although he probably will be). At his career peek Beckham will hit .300 with 20 HR and maybe 100 RBI. I read on another thread or maybe another site that they wouldn't include Beckham to get Pujols or Lincecum. So people overvalue Beckham, and we know he is probably gonna be a good player but he is no Pujols or Lincecum.

But would you rather have a (very) good player (.300, 20 HR, 100 RBI) or one year and two-plus months of Roy Halladay? I'd take Beckham, especially considering how cheap he'll be for the next few years.

Tragg
07-12-2009, 11:27 AM
I totally agree with you. I don't agree with people saying that Beckham has to be left out of a deal acquiring a superstar. You don't know that Beckham will be a sure thing (although he probably will be). At his career peek Beckham will hit .300 with 20 HR and maybe 100 RBI. I read on another thread or maybe another site that they wouldn't include Beckham to get Pujols or Lincecum. So people overvalue Beckham, and we know he is probably gonna be a good player but he is no Pujols or Lincecum.
And people overvalue what ONE pitcher brings to a team....especially one for 1.5 years to a team with many holes.
And there's no reason the Sox should pay more than the Mets paid for Santana and they didn't send anything close to Beckham.
We got essentially one very good (but not elite) prospect for Javy.
These big deals are not exactly Williams' specialty: Ritchie, Wells, Javy....all in search for that #1 pitcher and none worked out.
Heard it before - sell everything for AJ Burnett...

Much prefer fielding a competitive team every year to dumping every decent young talent.

Domeshot17
07-12-2009, 11:45 AM
And people overvalue what ONE pitcher brings to a team....especially one for 1.5 years to a team with many holes.
And there's no reason the Sox should pay more than the Mets paid for Santana and they didn't send anything close to Beckham.
Deals like this are not exactly Williams' speciality.
Heard it before - sell everything for AJ Burnett...

Much prefer fielding a competitive team every year to dumping every decent young talent.

You are not seriously comparing AJ Burnett and Roy Halladay are you?

Over By There
07-12-2009, 12:29 PM
FWIW, SI's Truth & Rumors (http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/110113-white-sox-looking-at-halladay?eref=sihp) cites Boston Globe, floating that Pena was perhaps acquired to let go of Bobby, in order to trim payroll to make a run at Halladay.

gr8mexico
07-12-2009, 12:48 PM
How can the Blue Jays be asking teams that they have to take either
Alex Rios or Vernon Wells when they both have full no trade clause. :scratch:
Even Roy Halladay has a full no trade clause. That just makes thing even harder to make
a trade work.

kitekrazy
07-12-2009, 04:37 PM
FWIW, SI's Truth & Rumors (http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/110113-white-sox-looking-at-halladay?eref=sihp) cites Boston Globe, floating that Pena was perhaps acquired to let go of Bobby, in order to trim payroll to make a run at Halladay.

That doesn't make sense. Maybe they will get rid of Dotel or Linebrink.

A starting pitcher is not what this team needs.

Tragg
07-12-2009, 04:43 PM
You are not seriously comparing AJ Burnett and Roy Halladay are you?
Of course not.
I am comparing the zeal to trade for Burnett with the zeal to trade for Halladay.

You don't seriously suggest that this Sox team is a legitimate WS contender with Roy Halladay, do you?

LoveYourSuit
07-12-2009, 04:55 PM
If the Sox are to make such a move, would it not be a great PR move to do it right before the Allstar break just to steal all the National Headlines during such a highly rated event?

WhiteSoxOnly
07-12-2009, 06:16 PM
That doesn't make sense. Maybe they will get rid of Dotel or Linebrink.

A starting pitcher is not what this team needs.

If Jose becomes the #5 guy in the rotation,then we would
be tough to beat.That means Richard goes back to long
relief,or the minors.So getting another starter is very big
and it is needed.Plenty of other areas where we need
help for sure,but top quality starters are the most important.

Domeshot17
07-12-2009, 09:14 PM
Of course not.
I am comparing the zeal to trade for Burnett with the zeal to trade for Halladay.

You don't seriously suggest that this Sox team is a legitimate WS contender with Roy Halladay, do you?

No I said that posts ago. I will say, the only thing I do believe, Halladay, if we make the playoffs, makes us a world series contender. Any team with a 1-2-3 of Halladay Burls Danks in the playoffs has a GREAT SHOT because pitching wins in the post season.

However, We need consistency from our offense. As I posted, outside of home runs, we are in the bottom half of almost every major offensive category going into the weekend, including bottom 4 in RBIs. Our bench is a collection of kids who are hitting under .250. I don't trade for Halladay because I don't feel like we are seriously trying to compete this year. This still what it was intended to be, a transition/growth year.

Frater Perdurabo
07-12-2009, 10:44 PM
With TCQ returning, we don't need Wells or Rios, or their salaries.

I suggest involving an NL team that needs a bat, like the Giants:

Sox get: Halladay
Jays get: Poreda, Richard, Giants SS prospect (Brandon Crawford/Nick Noonan), big time salary relief
Giants get: Wells

Obviously this would require Halladay and Wells approving their destinations.

Rotation: Halladay, Buehrle, Danks, Floyd, Contreras
Pen: Jenks, Linebrink, Thornton, Dotel, Pena, Carrasco, Colon
Lineup: Pods, Alexei, Dye, Thome, PK, AJ, TCQ, Beckham, Getz
Bench: BA (CF), Nix (IF, OF), Fields (1B, 3B), Castro (C)

Noneck
07-12-2009, 10:55 PM
I suggest involving an NL team that needs a bat, like the Giants:

Sox get: Halladay
Jays get: Poreda, Richard, Giants SS prospect (Brandon Crawford/Nick Noonan), big time salary relief
Giants get: Wells

Obviously this would require Halladay and Wells approving their destinations.



Tell me why the Giants would even want to be involved like this? If and that is a big if, they wanted to trade Brandon Crawford/Nick Noonan for Wells, they would just do it, no need for a 3way.

This is Poreda and Richard for one of the best there is. Things like that only happen in dreams.

BigP50
07-12-2009, 11:08 PM
I agree, but if we decide to go after a big name player like Halladay, i bet he will be in the deal.

gogosox16
07-12-2009, 11:13 PM
I agree, but if we decide to go after a big name player like Halladay, i bet he will be in the deal.
I could see that too, but I believe the Sox would think very hard about if they were to trade Flowers, what would they do for catcher after 2010? I Think a position player is far more valuable than a pitcher who pitches once every 5th day, but that's a very dabatable topic.

jabrch
07-12-2009, 11:14 PM
With TCQ returning, we don't need Wells or Rios, or their salaries.

I suggest involving an NL team that needs a bat, like the Giants:

Sox get: Halladay
Jays get: Poreda, Richard, Giants SS prospect (Brandon Crawford/Nick Noonan), big time salary relief
Giants get: Wells

Obviously this would require Halladay and Wells approving their destinations.

Rotation: Halladay, Buehrle, Danks, Floyd, Contreras
Pen: Jenks, Linebrink, Thornton, Dotel, Pena, Carrasco, Colon
Lineup: Pods, Alexei, Dye, Thome, PK, AJ, TCQ, Beckham, Getz
Bench: BA (CF), Nix (IF, OF), Fields (1B, 3B), Castro (C)

The only way I see this working is if we were to pay a big chunk of the Rios/Wells deal. Otherwise, I see no reason SF would do it.

Randar68
07-12-2009, 11:17 PM
I could see that too, but I believe the Sox would think very hard about if they were to trade Flowers, what would they do for catcher after 2010? I Think a position player is far more valuable than a pitcher who pitches once every 5th day, but that's a very dabatable topic.

An unproven player in AAA is more valuable than Roy Halladay? Pass me some of what you're smoking.

DirtySox
07-12-2009, 11:18 PM
Oh good. Another Halladay thread.

BigP50
07-12-2009, 11:19 PM
I could see that too, but I believe the Sox would think very hard about if they were to trade Flowers, what would they do for catcher after 2010? I Think a position player is far more valuable than a pitcher who pitches once every 5th day, but that's a very dabatable topic.


I can almost guarntee that if we get Halladay, Flowers will be in that deal. Im pretty sure there current catcher isn't anything special and they are looking for top prospects.

Harry Potter
07-12-2009, 11:22 PM
Oh good. Another Halladay thread.

seriously :angry:

BigP50
07-12-2009, 11:23 PM
seriously :angry:


haha, just imagine the rotation.

Ok im done

GregO23
07-12-2009, 11:41 PM
The only way I see this working is if we were to pay a big chunk of the Rios/Wells deal. Otherwise, I see no reason SF would do it.
Is this even allowed?

gr8mexico
07-13-2009, 12:57 AM
With TCQ returning, we don't need Wells or Rios, or their salaries.

I suggest involving an NL team that needs a bat, like the Giants:

Sox get: Halladay
Jays get: Poreda, Richard, Giants SS prospect (Brandon Crawford/Nick Noonan), big time salary relief
Giants get: Wells

Obviously this would require Halladay and Wells approving their destinations.

Rotation: Halladay, Buehrle, Danks, Floyd, Contreras
Pen: Jenks, Linebrink, Thornton, Dotel, Pena, Carrasco, Colon
Lineup: Pods, Alexei, Dye, Thome, PK, AJ, TCQ, Beckham, Getz
Bench: BA (CF), Nix (IF, OF), Fields (1B, 3B), Castro (C)
I think for this to work the Sox would have to send Jermaine Dye to the Giants and the Sox can get both Roy Halladay and Alex Rios instead of Vernon Wells. Alex Rios is owed way less then Vernon Wells.

GregO23
07-13-2009, 01:08 AM
I think for this to work the Sox would have to send Jermaine Dye to the Giants and the Sox can get both Roy Halladay and Alex Rios instead of Vernon Wells. Alex Rios is owed way less then Vernon Wells.
Wow I love Dye, but that would be amazing. No way this happens unless we send the Jays Alexei too.

LoveYourSuit
07-13-2009, 01:24 AM
I think for this to work the Sox would have to send Jermaine Dye to the Giants and the Sox can get both Roy Halladay and Alex Rios instead of Vernon Wells. Alex Rios is owed way less then Vernon Wells.


I think you're on to something.

I would jump all over that.

From the current ML Roster:

Dye + Alexei
for
Halladay and Rios

Very tempting.

We would have to throw in a 3rd piece I would assume.

gr8mexico
07-13-2009, 01:25 AM
Wow I love Dye, but that would be amazing. No way this happens unless we send the Jays Alexei too.
The Jays want to dump salary and if the Sox would agree to take on all of Alex Rios contract I'm sure they can make it work.

cws05champ
07-13-2009, 08:09 AM
I can almost guarntee that if we get Halladay, Flowers will be in that deal. Im pretty sure there current catcher isn't anything special and they are looking for top prospects.
Toronto's # 2 prospect in their system is a catcher(JP Arencibia), and they have a pretty good 1B prospect as well(David Cooper).

Tragg
07-13-2009, 03:30 PM
An unproven player in AAA is more valuable than Roy Halladay? Pass me some of what you're smoking.
The same unproven A ball catcher was equal to Javy Vasquez.

Frater Perdurabo
07-13-2009, 10:41 PM
I think for this to work the Sox would have to send Jermaine Dye to the Giants and the Sox can get both Roy Halladay and Alex Rios instead of Vernon Wells. Alex Rios is owed way less then Vernon Wells.

I guess this would be OK. KW should demand 72 hours to negotiate an extension with Halladay. And of course, Halladay and Rios would have to approve being traded to the Sox. Rios isn't the power hitter Dye is, but he's younger, faster, and can steal some bases.

Sox get: Halladay, Rios
Jays get: Poreda, Richard, Brandon Crawford/Nick Noonan
Giants get: Dye

This year, put Quentin in RF, Rios in CF and Pods in LF. Long term, Rios and Quentin become the corner OFs, with Danks and Mitchell eventually fighting it out for the CF/leadoff job. If both become solid MLB hitters, maybe Quentin goes to DH.

Noneck
07-13-2009, 10:59 PM
I guess this would be OK. KW should demand 72 hours to negotiate an extension with Halladay. And of course, Halladay and Rios would have to approve being traded to the Sox. Rios isn't the power hitter Dye is, but he's younger, faster, and can steal some bases.

Sox get: Halladay, Rios
Jays get: Poreda, Richard, Brandon Crawford/Nick Noonan
Giants get: Dye

This year, put Quentin in RF, Rios in CF and Pods in LF. Long term, Rios and Quentin become the corner OFs, with Danks and Mitchell eventually fighting it out for the CF/leadoff job. If both become solid MLB hitters, maybe Quentin goes to DH.

Well, if you are saying that this is contingent on the Sox extending Halladays contract, then the deals dead. Sox pick up Rios contract and extend Halladays at about 80m over 4 years. Not going to happen under this ownership.

Also if the Sox get 72 to extend Halladays, the Giants would want the same for Dye.

gr8mexico
07-14-2009, 02:21 AM
Well, if you are saying that this is contingent on the Sox extending Halladays contract, then the deals dead. Sox pick up Rios contract and extend Halladays at about 80m over 4 years. Not going to happen under this ownership.

Also if the Sox get 72 to extend Halladays, the Giants would want the same for Dye.
You can always let Roy Halladay walk and take the picks. But The Sox will have money to pay Roy Halladay when He becomes a FA after the 2010 season. Paul Konerko, A.J. Pierzynski ,and Jermaine Dye will become Free Agents after the 2010 season. And with the money coming off the books this year they should have enough to pay Roy Halladay.

Lip Man 1
07-14-2009, 12:41 PM
Dye is a free agent after this season along with Contraras, Thome and Dotel.

Lip

jabrch
07-14-2009, 01:12 PM
Dye is a free agent after this season along with Contraras, Thome and Dotel.

Lip

Dye has a mutual 12mm option next year. So he may be a FA - but he may not.

LoveYourSuit
07-14-2009, 01:58 PM
Dye has a mutual 12mm option next year. So he may be a FA - but he may not.


I have a feeling Dye and Konerko might be here for a very long time beyond their current contracts.

UofCSoxFan
07-14-2009, 02:46 PM
Is this even allowed?

Why wouldn't it be? Players are traded in deals that include cash considerations all the time (which is used to alleviate the burden to the acquiring team). Sox received cash in both the Contreras and Thome deals (reportedly $22 million in the Thome deal).

RedHeadPaleHoser
07-14-2009, 02:49 PM
I have a feeling Dye and Konerko might be here for a very long time beyond their current contracts.

What makes you say that?

Noneck
07-14-2009, 03:22 PM
I have a feeling Dye and Konerko might be here for a very long time beyond their current contracts.

Konerko is down the road so that will wait to be seen. Dye is having way too good of a year and will command money that will be beyond Sox affordability. Dye is getting kinda long in the tooth and should realize this is his last chance for a big payday. I really don't think he will bite on too much of that home town discount stuff this time around.

DSpivack
07-14-2009, 07:30 PM
Konerko is down the road so that will wait to be seen. Dye is having way too good of a year and will command money that will be beyond Sox affordability. Dye is getting kinda long in the tooth and should realize this is his last chance for a big payday. I really don't think he will bite on too much of that home town discount stuff this time around.

Well, I don't doubt his option is picked up in the offseason, so I don't think he'll be a free agent for a year.

thedudeabides
07-14-2009, 08:00 PM
Well, I don't doubt his option is picked up in the offseason, so I don't think he'll be a free agent for a year.

I think it's likely he gets an extension in the offseason. I don't see any way they could let him do.

Noneck
07-14-2009, 09:11 PM
Well, I don't doubt his option is picked up in the offseason, so I don't think he'll be a free agent for a year.

It is a mutual option. Do you think Dye will be satisfied with 12m for next year and nothing beyond?
A crap year or injury and then he is SOL. I think he would want a 3 year extension.

DSpivack
07-14-2009, 09:25 PM
It is a mutual option. Do you think Dye will be satisfied with 12m for next year and nothing beyond?
A crap year or injury and then he is SOL. I think he would want a 3 year extension.

It being a mutual option is the key. I don't see the Sox turning it down.

Noneck
07-14-2009, 09:49 PM
It being a mutual option is the key. I don't see the Sox turning it down.

The key to me is that Dye may turn it down without an extension and he probably should.

DSpivack
07-14-2009, 10:07 PM
The key to me is that Dye may turn it down without an extension and he probably should.

Is it a mutual option in the sense that both must agree, or that either side may enact the option for 2010?

Noneck
07-14-2009, 10:08 PM
Is it a mutual option in the sense that both must agree, or that either side may enact the option for 2010?

Both must agree, Sox may try to enact and Dye says no. I just think Dye should realize that nows the time to get the most he can and the 1 year at 12m is not the way to go.

35th and Shields
07-14-2009, 11:08 PM
Both must agree, Sox may try to enact and Dye says no. I just think Dye should realize that nows the time to get the most he can and the 1 year at 12m is not the way to go.

Dye took less money to come here in 05, an under market deal in 07 and has shown no indication of a desire to leave. If anything, I think more signs or pointing to him staying then leaving.

DickAllen72
07-14-2009, 11:14 PM
Both must agree, Sox may try to enact and Dye says no. I just think Dye should realize that nows the time to get the most he can and the 1 year at 12m is not the way to go.
Really? I don't understand this kind of option then. So in other words if both Dye and the Sox agree, Dye plays for the Sox next year for $12M. If the Sox want him at $12M but Dye says no, then he's a free agent. If Dye wants to play for the Sox for $12M but the Sox say no, then he's a free agent.

If the above is true, then what's the difference between that mutual option and no option at all? If they both agree to $12M they sign a contract for $12M. If they both agree on $10M, they sign a contract for that amount. If they both agree on $14M.......

I always thought a "mutual option" meant that either party has the option. If the team wants to exercise it's option then the player is bound to play for the season whether he prefers or not. If the player chooses to exercise his option, the team is bound to pay him the agreed amount for the year whether they prefer or not.

Noneck
07-14-2009, 11:33 PM
Really? I don't understand this kind of option then. So in other words if both Dye and the Sox agree, Dye plays for the Sox next year for $12M. If the Sox want him at $12M but Dye says no, then he's a free agent. If Dye wants to play for the Sox for $12M but the Sox say no, then he's a free agent.

If the above is true, then what's the difference between that mutual option and no option at all? If they both agree to $12M they sign a contract for $12M. If they both agree on $10M, they sign a contract for that amount. If they both agree on $14M.......

I always thought a "mutual option" meant that either party has the option. If the team wants to exercise it's option then the player is bound to play for the season whether he prefers or not. If the player chooses to exercise his option, the team is bound to pay him the agreed amount for the year whether they prefer or not.

I was confused on this also. Jack McDowell responded on this to me from his blog,

"Remember he has what is called a "mutual option" for next year. That means even if the club decides they'd like him back, he can choose to go out and sign with anyone else or push for a multi-year with the Sox."

pmck003
07-14-2009, 11:37 PM
Really? I don't understand this kind of option then. So in other words if both Dye and the Sox agree, Dye plays for the Sox next year for $12M. If the Sox want him at $12M but Dye says no, then he's a free agent. If Dye wants to play for the Sox for $12M but the Sox say no, then he's a free agent.

If the above is true, then what's the difference between that mutual option and no option at all? If they both agree to $12M they sign a contract for $12M. If they both agree on $10M, they sign a contract for that amount. If they both agree on $14M.......

I always thought a "mutual option" meant that either party has the option. If the team wants to exercise it's option then the player is bound to play for the season whether he prefers or not. If the player chooses to exercise his option, the team is bound to pay him the agreed amount for the year whether they prefer or not.

Mutual Options are pretty pointless - I think the player can have a buyout option which would make it have some value

http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2008/09/mutual_of_ohmyh.php

DickAllen72
07-15-2009, 12:05 AM
Mutual Options are pretty pointless - I think the player can have a buyout option which would make it have some value

http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2008/09/mutual_of_ohmyh.php
Thanks for that link. It does seem that a "mutual option" is pretty useless.

asindc
07-15-2009, 10:35 AM
The point of the mutual option is that both parties know what the terms are ahead of time and no negotiation is needed. The team already has an idea of how Dye's salary would fit into its 2010 season plans, and Dye knows actually what he will be paid. It just eliminates the uncertainty and need for negotiation if both parties want it.

cws05champ
07-15-2009, 01:19 PM
The point of the mutual option is that both parties know what the terms are ahead of time and no negotiation is needed. The team already has an idea of how Dye's salary would fit into its 2010 season plans, and Dye knows actually what he will be paid. It just eliminates the uncertainty and need for negotiation if both parties want it.
Exactly.... IMO, Dye really should jump at the chance for the $12M option considering comparable guys last off season were struggling to find jobs. At 34/35yrs old he may not get a multi year deal out there more than $8M per.

soxfanreggie
07-15-2009, 01:21 PM
I think it really depends on if he can still get a 3 or 4 year deal. He may want the 3 or 4 year deal at $32 million than one year at $12 million and nothing guaranteed past that. That being said, maybe we would be willing to work with him to match that, essentially tearing up the mutual year.

gr8mexico
07-15-2009, 02:20 PM
I think it really depends on if he can still get a 3 or 4 year deal. He may want the 3 or 4 year deal at $32 million than one year at $12 million and nothing guaranteed past that. That being said, maybe we would be willing to work with him to match that, essentially tearing up the mutual year.
No way should the Sox pay that much to keep him. Paying 12 mil for him is too much already. Better options can become available next year.
Matt Holliday, Jason Bay, Bobby Abreu, Vladimir Guerrero, Xavier Nady, Johnny Damon, Carl Crawford ( TB might decline his option) . Jermaine Dye is already 36 years old and at the same age Bobby Abreu got payed way less then the money Jermaine Dye makes now.

jabrch
07-15-2009, 02:25 PM
No way should the Sox pay that much to keep him. Paying 12 mil for him is too much already. Better options can become available next year.
Matt Holliday, Jason Bay, Bobby Abreu, Vladimir Guerrero, Xavier Nady, Johnny Damon, Carl Crawford ( TB might decline his option) . Jermaine Dye is already 36 years old and at the same age Bobby Abreu got payed way less then the money Jermaine Dye makes now.


None of those guys is better than JD. In fact - not close.

GAsoxfan
07-15-2009, 03:22 PM
None of those guys is better than JD. In fact - not close.

For 2010 and beyond, I'd rather have the 30 yr old Holliday than the 36 yr old Dye. I agree with you about the other players.

DSpivack
07-15-2009, 03:28 PM
For 2010 and beyond, I'd rather have the 30 yr old Holliday than the 36 yr old Dye. I agree with you about the other players.

For next season, I wouldn't. I'm still not convinced Holliday is that good of a hitter outside Coors Field, and he's going to demand mad $$$ this offseason.

munchman33
07-15-2009, 04:10 PM
With the year Dye is having, someone is going to give him three years for sizeable dollars. Sure, the market sucks. But he's probably the best right handed hitter out there next year.

Noneck
07-15-2009, 04:13 PM
With the year Dye is having, someone is going to give him three years for sizeable dollars. Sure, the market sucks. But he's probably the best right handed hitter out there next year.
And that team wont be the Sox.

munchman33
07-15-2009, 04:21 PM
And that team wont be the Sox.

You're probably right.

LoveYourSuit
07-15-2009, 05:49 PM
And that team wont be the Sox.


If the Sox go to Dye today and tell him, let's re-up right now for 3 years 30 million and tear up that mutual option for next season..... I think Dye would take it.


Dye loves it here and the team (front office) think very highly of him.

Noneck
07-15-2009, 06:04 PM
If the Sox go to Dye today and tell him, let's re-up right now for 3 years 30 million and tear up that mutual option for next season..... I think Dye would take it.


Dye loves it here and the team (front office) think very highly of him.
I think Dye would take it also but I don't think that's within the Sox current affordability.

munchman33
07-15-2009, 07:40 PM
I think Dye would take it also but I don't think that's within the Sox current affordability.

Agreed. It wouldn't make a lot of sense given the direction of the franchise.

russ99
07-15-2009, 07:48 PM
Agreed. It wouldn't make a lot of sense given the direction of the franchise.

Very true, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Sox exercise the $12M option for next year, especially if Thome's off the books.

I doubt Jermaine would turn it down too, since despite his very good recent seasons, he'll be 36 next January, and I seriously doubt he'd come close to $12M on the open market, also figuring the FA market will be down due to the economy.

The Sox would still be on the hook for $1M buyout if the option is declined.

LoveYourSuit
07-15-2009, 07:51 PM
I think Dye would take it also but I don't think that's within the Sox current affordability.


Affordability?

$10 million per season for a guy who can still hit you 30+ and drive in 100 is not something out of our price range.

I know everyone is buying into this notion that we are going young, but you also need a pair of veteran sticks in there to go along with the youth.

The other veteran options out there which were named are not as good as Dye IMO and more than likely will cost just about the same.

LoveYourSuit
07-15-2009, 07:53 PM
Very true, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Sox exercise the $12M option for next year, especially if Thome's off the books.

Dye would have to accept that option also, since it's mutual. I can see Dye coming back and asking for a pair of years added to his contract so that he can retire here in exchange to dropping next year's salary to $10 million.

thedudeabides
07-15-2009, 08:19 PM
Dye would have to accept that option also, since it's mutual. I can see Dye coming back and asking for a pair of years added to his contract so that he can retire here in exchange to dropping next year's salary to $10 million.

That sounds entirely reasonable, and I could see even 2 yrs, and an 3rd option yr. Dye and the Sox seem to have a very good relationship and I think all parties would like him to be here.

Some are doubting that's the direction the Sox are going in, but you have to have some veteran presence and leadership. Dye seems to be a great guy to have around to help show the young guys how to go about their business. Not to mention, he is still a premier bat in the league.

soxfanreggie
07-16-2009, 08:08 AM
I don't think Dye fits in the "not affordable" range. If we sign him to a $10 million deal, that's still a $1.5 million savings. Add that to Thome's $13 million and Contreras' $10 million, and we still have $25 million off the books there with a "current" payroll heading into next season at approx. $70 million. Then, throw in Dotel off the books at $5.5 million, and you're even lower. We could even consider moving Dye to DH if we pick up Rios and Dye could still be a backup for RF.

I would love to pick up another lefty bat if we lose Thome, but I'm not sure what we'd be looking at to fill that void.