PDA

View Full Version : dodgers still want frank and PK


habibharu
02-11-2004, 10:42 AM
according to the LA times the only way the dodgers will sign maddux is if they trade perez for a hitter. they want PK of hurt, but especially hurt. the sox supposedly want prospects for PK.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-dodgers11feb11,1,1104838.story?coll=la-headlines-sports

jabrch
02-11-2004, 10:48 AM
I'd do PK for Perez. Perez is no all-star, but he would be OK for our 4th/5th starter spot. For Frank, they would have to pay through the nose. There is no way I'd give them Frank unless they start off with Perez, Mota and Jackson/Miller.

mantis1212
02-11-2004, 11:04 AM
Originally posted by habibharu
according to the LA times the only way the dodgers will sign maddux is if they trade perez for a hitter. they want PK of hurt, but especially hurt. the sox supposedly want prospects for PK.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-dodgers11feb11,1,1104838.story?coll=la-headlines-sports

Report seems a little uninformed, wouldn't Frank get $8 Million next year if he's traded? That would mean Konerko and Thomas would both make the same if they wore dodger blue next year. Why can't the Dodgers just take Paulie already? Come'on McCourt!!

SEALgep
02-11-2004, 11:44 AM
Originally posted by mantis1212
Report seems a little uninformed, wouldn't Frank get $8 Million next year if he's traded? That would mean Konerko and Thomas would both make the same if they wore dodger blue next year. Why can't the Dodgers just take Paulie already? Come'on McCourt!! I think they're trying to get the GM situated first, and then they will probably make a formal offer for one or the other.

Dadawg_77
02-11-2004, 11:45 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
I think they're trying to get the GM situated first, and then they will probably make a formal offer for one or the other.

If DePosta(sp?) gets the job the Dodgers will want Frank.

Deadguy
02-11-2004, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by habibharu
according to the LA times the only way the dodgers will sign maddux is if they trade perez for a hitter. they want PK of hurt, but especially hurt. the sox supposedly want prospects for PK.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-dodgers11feb11,1,1104838.story?coll=la-headlines-sports

For the love of God KW, don't get greedy when dealing to get the GIDP king out of this town. Just take whatever the Dodgers offer for PK, and sign off on the deal.

SEALgep
02-11-2004, 11:53 AM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
If DePosta(sp?) gets the job the Dodgers will want Frank. That's fine, but they know the price.

lowesox
02-11-2004, 12:11 PM
Originally posted by Deadguy
For the love of God KW, don't get greedy when dealing to get the GIDP king out of this town. Just take whatever the Dodgers offer for PK, and sign off on the deal.

I disagree completely. Get greedy. Konerko's value is much lower than it could/should be. If the price isn't right - wait til next year to trade him.

sas1974
02-11-2004, 12:15 PM
Originally posted by lowesox
I disagree completely. Get greedy. Konerko's value is much lower than it could/should be. If the price isn't right - wait til next year to trade him.

I agree. We've got them right where we want them.

And let's not forget...I don't think K-Dub is going to forget about that little stunt that Evan's pulled on him anytime soon. I don't think he'll be doing them any favors.

Rex Hudler
02-11-2004, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by mantis1212
Report seems a little uninformed, wouldn't Frank get $8 Million next year if he's traded? That would mean Konerko and Thomas would both make the same if they wore dodger blue next year. Why can't the Dodgers just take Paulie already? Come'on McCourt!!

There is a $2 million bonus for Frank if he gets traded, but who pays that bonus remains to be seen. If the Sox ask for more than Perez, the Dodgers may give in, but ask the Sox to pay the $2 million. Or, perhaps his contract dictates that the Sox pay him the money. No way to be sure.

CubKilla
02-11-2004, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by jabrch
For Frank, they would have to pay through the nose. There is no way I'd give them Frank unless they start off with Perez, Mota and Jackson/Miller.

1.) LA will not part with Jackson/Miller
2.) LA will not "pay through the nose" for a player who, offensively, is on the decline and who's defense is a liability.

PK for Perez and/or Mota and/or prospects is the only possible deal that I think is reasonable for both teams.

poorme
02-11-2004, 12:53 PM
When will Mota be a FA? He's been around a while, and you know he'd be gone as soon as he became a FA.

SEALgep
02-11-2004, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by poorme
When will Mota be a FA? He's been around a while, and you know he'd be gone as soon as he became a FA. Not sure, but Perez is a FA after this year. Yet to some, Perez for Thomas straight up is fair. There's something in the Cali air.

jeremyb1
02-11-2004, 01:31 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
If DePosta(sp?) gets the job the Dodgers will want Frank.

I feel like this is a situation where people fail to perceive some of the complexities of the A's strategies. Depodesta is certainly a fan of OBP but that doesn't necessarily mean he's a fan of acquiring 36 year old hitters with substantial long term contracts simply due to a good OBP.

LATruBlue
02-11-2004, 01:33 PM
I'm sure that most of you all know my position by now (well, those of you that have read my posts at least), so there is no need for me to really debate the merits of any trade scenarios right now.

Some of you may know that I don't really trust McCourt and think he will do some really dumb things like trade our coveted rookie pitchers. But I wanted to post a paragraph from a recent question and answer session from McCourt that may give some insight into his baseball management style. It actually gives me some hope that he is not as dumb as his mouth has indicated. He is essentially talking about the Dodger future and most likely Jackson and Miller.


From McCourt:
My job as the owner is to deliver a championship to Dodgers fans, and I want to do it in a way where we don't mortgage the future .


Q: What's your philosophy on trading prospects for proven players?

A: Sometimes, to contend, its something you have to do. We may have to part with one or two of our blue chippers if we want to contend, but we would have to get fair value in return. There are a couple of guys who I consider pretty close to untouchable - which means that I would only trade them if we got a superstar player in return and got to keep him for a number of years.

So, I guess the bigger question is does McCourt consider Frank Thomas a superstar? I would guess that he doesn't, else some type of deal would have been consummated by now. And secondly, he is reffering to not trading his "untouchables" for any one year superstar rentals either.

Good for you Frank.

SEALgep
02-11-2004, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by LATruBlue
I'm sure that most of you all know my position by now (well, those of you that have read my posts at least), so there is no need for me to really debate the merits of any trade scenarios right now.

Some of you may know that I don't really trust McCourt and think he will do some really dumb things like trade our coveted rookie pitchers. But I wanted to post a paragraph from a recent question and answer session from McCourt that may give some insight into his baseball management style. It actually gives me some hope that he is not as dumb as his mouth has indicated. He is essentially talking about the Dodger future and most likely Jackson and Miller.


From McCourt:



Q: What's your philosophy on trading prospects for proven players?



So, I guess the bigger question is does McCourt consider Frank Thomas a superstar? I would guess that he doesn't, else some type of deal would have been consummated by now. And secondly, he is reffering to not trading his "untouchables" for any one year superstar rentals either.

Good for you Frank.

Could be the case, but a deal not being done already is probably more of a GM issue than Frank not being a superstar. Also Frank is locked in for three years, so he wouldn't be considered a rental player.

Dadawg_77
02-11-2004, 02:05 PM
Originally posted by jeremyb1
I feel like this is a situation where people fail to perceive some of the complexities of the A's strategies. Depodesta is certainly a fan of OBP but that doesn't necessarily mean he's a fan of acquiring 36 year old hitters with substantial long term contracts simply due to a good OBP.

The long term contract issue is because of the A's restrictions on payroll. I am assuming with the Dodger those restrictions will be loosen quite a bit thus you can afford to take on bigger and long contracts. As for aging OBP is one of the last skills to go, so Frank could become the Dodger's Justice.

Plus the statement was referring to judgment between Frank and Paul.

tlebar318
02-12-2004, 11:40 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77


The long term contract issue is because of the A's restrictions on payroll. I am assuming with the Dodger those restrictions will be loosen quite a bit thus you can afford to take on bigger and long contracts. As for aging OBP is one of the last skills to go, so Frank could become the Dodger's Justice.

Plus the statement was referring to judgment between Frank and Paul.

Hey Dawg-
Obviously you are a Democrat--Who are you switching to when Dean drops from the race? I am a GDI so I don't keep a party affiliation per se but just want what is best for the country--
Back to Baseball...I say this deal gets done with Big Frank's blessing at some point--I don't think he wants to play for Ozzie--just need to work out the compensation to the Sox--Beer me! :gulp: For the record, my favorite presidents during my lifetime have been Reagan and Clinton(pre-Lewinsky) :D:

LASOXFAN
02-13-2004, 12:24 AM
Originally posted by SEALgep
Not sure, but Perez is a FA after this year. Yet to some, Perez for Thomas straight up is fair. There's something in the Cali air.

That's what I'm hearing on local sports radio here in lala land. They seem to think that both Ozzie and KW don't like the hurt and want him gone.

gee, wonder where they got that idea.

SEALgep
02-13-2004, 12:45 AM
Originally posted by LASOXFAN
That's what I'm hearing on local sports radio here in lala land. They seem to think that both Ozzie and KW don't like the hurt and want him gone.

gee, wonder where they got that idea. They may choose to believe that, but that won't make bargaining any easier on them, because that simply is not the case. Thomas is still an effective hitter, and would be impossible to replace especially this late in the offseason and the money he's making. Perez is a good pitcher, but Thomas is more valuable, at least in my opinion. I think the Thomas fiasco isn't as bad as it is being portrayed, and I am even more positive that it won't affect KW's decision to demand fair compensation if we were to trade him. KW wants a winner, and trading Thomas for just Perez puts us in a worse position. I admit I have more confidence in KW than most here, but I don't believe his personal views will interfere with his desire to win.

Tragg
02-13-2004, 12:54 AM
Originally posted by LATruBlue
I'm sure that most of you all know my position by now (well, those of you that have read my posts at least), so there is no need for me to really debate the merits of any trade scenarios right now.

Some of you may know that I don't really trust McCourt and think he will do some really dumb things like trade our coveted rookie pitchers. But I wanted to post a paragraph from a recent question and answer session from McCourt that may give some insight into his baseball management style. It actually gives me some hope that he is not as dumb as his mouth has indicated. He is essentially talking about the Dodger future and most likely Jackson and Miller.


From McCourt:



Q: What's your philosophy on trading prospects for proven players?



So, I guess the bigger question is does McCourt consider Frank Thomas a superstar? I would guess that he doesn't, else some type of deal would have been consummated by now. And secondly, he is reffering to not trading his "untouchables" for any one year superstar rentals either.

Good for you Frank.

That's nice, but it doesn't look like the Dodgers will do a lot of trading

If all you want to offer is veteran stiffs, you don't get FRank Thomas- you MIGHT get konerko for someone like Perez, but that's a big MIGHT.

SSN721
02-13-2004, 08:09 AM
I still feel that even discussing Frank for only Perez is preposterous. I admit I am a little bias and would ask for more then is probably reasonable since I want to see Frank finish his career in Chicago. I just dont see how you could possibly replace his production for his price, so I agree with other comments made that I beleive he is more valuable right now then Perez on his own, throw in one of the stud prospects and perhaps Mota, then I wouldnt be so upset about the trade, but still would not like to see it happen.