PDA

View Full Version : Way too much for RJ at 41...


SoxFanTillDeath
11-12-2004, 09:49 AM
I just read on Chicagosports.com that the Diamondbacks are looking at Konerko, Garland, AND Brian Anderson for Randy Johnson, and it also mentioned that they have said no to a deal right now with the all the negativity going on in their organization thanks to Wally Backman and them losing the Asst. GM.

Forget about RJ. I hope KW isn't dumb enough to give up all three of those players, because it doesn't fix anything on our team. We need another starter, so even if we do get RJ we still will have a problem with the 5 spot. Also, with losing Maggs and (hopefully) Borchard and Reed in the past year, what used to be our deepest position (OF) is now weak...we can't afford trading away another stud outfielder.

I would love RJ in a sox uniform, but he ain't worth the house at 41. Sorry.

Here's the linky. (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-041111soxunit,1,5378867.story?coll=cs-home-headlines)

SoxFanTillDeath
11-12-2004, 09:51 AM
By the way, I find it funny how before the RJ rumors surfaced everyone was saying how we HAD to get a 5th started because we didn't have anything good enough in house, and now everyone would be happy with Grilli at the 5. Will someone please make up their mind?

mweflen
11-12-2004, 09:55 AM
I agree. I'd rather see Jon Lieber picked up as a FA. If we're going to trade a young in-his-prime player like Konerko, we need to get a player who will be valuable to us over a similar time frame - i.e. someone NOT in their 40s!

Flight #24
11-12-2004, 09:58 AM
I just read on Chicagosports.com that the Diamondbacks are looking at Konerko, Garland, AND Brian Anderson for Randy Johnson, and it also mentioned that they have said no to a deal right now with the all the negativity going on in their organization thanks to Wally Backman and them losing the Asst. GM.

Forget about RJ. I hope KW isn't dumb enough to give up all three of those players, because it doesn't fix anything on our team. We need another starter, so even if we do get RJ we still will have a problem with the 5 spot. Also, with losing Maggs and (hopefully) Borchard and Reed in the past year, what used to be our deepest position (OF) is now weak...we can't afford trading away another stud outfielder.

I would love RJ in a sox uniform, but he ain't worth the house at 41. Sorry.

Here's the linky. (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-041111soxunit,1,5378867.story?coll=cs-home-headlines)
Yeah, I'd do Jon+Paulie but no way I include Anderson.

Well, not unless we're getting enough cash in the deal to go out and sign a JD Drew, thereby giving us at least 2 years of Drew-Rowand-Lee! But there's no way 'Zona trades RJ+significant cash.

Clembasbal
11-12-2004, 10:11 AM
Yeah, I'd do Jon+Paulie but no way I include Anderson.

Well, not unless we're getting enough cash in the deal to go out and sign a JD Drew, thereby giving us at least 2 years of Drew-Rowand-Lee! But there's no way 'Zona trades RJ+significant cash.
Arizona has no cash. They need to either trade straight up (which will be stupid for them) or trade for big talent, and have the other side eat the salary...and the Sox will not do that.

Flight #24
11-12-2004, 10:13 AM
Arizona has no cash. They need to either trade straight up (which will be stupid for them) or trade for big talent, and have the other side eat the salary...and the Sox will not do that.
Outside of the Yankees, I don't see anyone making a trade where they both give up big talent AND eat salary. MLB doesn't work that way these days. You can get salary relief or talent, but with one glaring exception (NYY), not both.

guillen4life13
11-12-2004, 10:14 AM
I don't even really want to trade for Randy at all. There's no way to land him without overpaying greatly, and as a 41 year old, he isn't gonna sustain for much more than a season.

hold2dibber
11-12-2004, 10:36 AM
I agree. I'd rather see Jon Lieber picked up as a FA. If we're going to trade a young in-his-prime player like Konerko, we need to get a player who will be valuable to us over a similar time frame - i.e. someone NOT in their 40s!
But PK's going into his contract year, and there's no guarantee he'll be around after this year anyway (and, in fact, in light of the contract they just gave CLee and in light of the fact that the organization appears to be committed to fielding more of a speed/defense/pitching type of team, my guess he's not going to be re-signed anyway). I wouldn't add Anderson to the deal, but I'd sure as hell trade PK and Garland for RJ (although I'd hope they'd still go out and try to find another half-decent starter, like Paul Byrd or Wilson Alvarez or some other low cost option).

kittle42
11-12-2004, 10:44 AM
Good. Can we just forget about all this Randy Johnson talk already?

Brian26
11-12-2004, 10:46 AM
Yeah, I'm glad everyone is in agreement on this. Giving up PK, Garland AND Anderson is insane...especially when it will probably be for only 1 year (maybe 2) of RJ. It's hard to justify that.

santo=dorf
11-12-2004, 11:46 AM
I'd do that trade if Arizona threw in a lower level prospect. :smile: If not, I would give them PK, Garland, and a lower prospect for RJ.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 12:18 PM
I'd do that trade if Arizona threw in a lower level prospect. :smile: If not, I would give them PK, Garland, and a lower prospect for RJ.I think I pretty much agree with this. PK, JG and a lower prospect sounds about right. That's still a hell of a lot for one player when you think about it.

hitlesswonder
11-12-2004, 12:54 PM
I think I pretty much agree with this. PK, JG and a lower prospect sounds about right. That's still a hell of a lot for one player when you think about it.
If I were the AZ GM, I think that's pretty much the floor of what I would want for Johnson. In fact, I think I would hold out for Anderson or McCarthy at least, and maybe even Rowand or Uribe. If Konerko were to agree to an extension, then it might be more attractive. But as it stands, Garland and Konerko together will make more than Johnson next season (since his money is partly deferred). And I don't think either one has a contract beyond next season. Does anyone know if Garland is a FA then? He'll be in his 6th season. If I were AZ I'd either want to save a lot of money, or have some decent players under contract beyond next season.

santo=dorf
11-12-2004, 01:15 PM
If I were the AZ GM, I think that's pretty much the floor of what I would want for Johnson. In fact, I think I would hold out for Anderson or McCarthy at least, and maybe even Rowand or Uribe. If Konerko were to agree to an extension, then it might be more attractive. But as it stands, Garland and Konerko together will make more than Johnson next season (since his money is partly deferred). And I don't think either one has a contract beyond next season. Does anyone know if Garland is a FA then? He'll be in his 6th season. If I were AZ I'd either want to save a lot of money, or have some decent players under contract beyond next season.
Rogers mentions in his article how there could be a condition where AZ has 72 hours to sign PK to an extension, otherwise the trade would be off.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 01:16 PM
If I were the AZ GM, I think that's pretty much the floor of what I would want for Johnson. In fact, I think I would hold out for Anderson or McCarthy at least, and maybe even Rowand or Uribe. If Konerko were to agree to an extension, then it might be more attractive. But as it stands, Garland and Konerko together will make more than Johnson next season (since his money is partly deferred). And I don't think either one has a contract beyond next season. Does anyone know if Garland is a FA then? He'll be in his 6th season. If I were AZ I'd either want to save a lot of money, or have some decent players under contract beyond next season.Everything I've read indicates that this deal only goes if PK agrees to an extension. The story in this morning's Trib said that it would be conditional on AZ reaching an extension agreement within 72 hr. I'm pretty sure 2004 was the first year Garland was eligible for arbitration, so that would mean he wouldn't be a FA until after 2006.

PaulDrake
11-12-2004, 01:25 PM
I don't even really want to trade for Randy at all. There's no way to land him without overpaying greatly, and as a 41 year old, he isn't gonna sustain for much more than a season. I was thinking that maybe I'm the only one here who thinks this way. I guess there at least two of us. I would like to see the White Sox get their act together for the long haul. I'm old and remember that the first eleven seasons I watched and rooted for the Sox they had winning seasons. There were six other winning seasons before I came on board. I just refuse to get excited while the Sox "braintrust" chases after one old warhorse after another, while an already depleted young talent pool gets even thinner. This will not lead to success in the short term, let alone over any longer period of time.

ChiSoxBobette
11-12-2004, 01:50 PM
I just read on Chicagosports.com that the Diamondbacks are looking at Konerko, Garland, AND Brian Anderson for Randy Johnson, and it also mentioned that they have said no to a deal right now with the all the negativity going on in their organization thanks to Wally Backman and them losing the Asst. GM.

Forget about RJ. I hope KW isn't dumb enough to give up all three of those players, because it doesn't fix anything on our team. We need another starter, so even if we do get RJ we still will have a problem with the 5 spot. Also, with losing Maggs and (hopefully) Borchard and Reed in the past year, what used to be our deepest position (OF) is now weak...we can't afford trading away another stud outfielder.

I would love RJ in a sox uniform, but he ain't worth the house at 41. Sorry.

Here's the linky. (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-041111soxunit,1,5378867.story?coll=cs-home-headlines)You got that right, Paul Konerko, Jon Garland & Brian Anderson not to mention that Arizona asked about Aaron Rowand and we did'nt say no WAY TO MUCH for someone who's 41 years old.

SoxFanTillDeath
11-12-2004, 02:05 PM
...not to mention that Arizona asked about Aaron Rowand and we did'nt say no WAY TO MUCH for someone who's 41 years old.
I didn't know that. That's ridiculous...I can't believe he's not on the untouchable list. Where did you hear that?

Wealz
11-12-2004, 02:15 PM
You got that right, Paul Konerko, Jon Garland & Brian Anderson not to mention that Arizona asked about Aaron Rowand and we did'nt say no WAY TO MUCH for someone who's 41 years old.
I don't think it's all that much to be honest. One year of Konerko whose stats were severely inflated by the cell, Garland who's a league-average starter up for arbitration with McCarthey waiting in the wings, and Brian Anderson who isn't an impact prospect at a position where they already have Rowand.

In other words, I'd do it

hitlesswonder
11-12-2004, 02:19 PM
I didn't know that. That's ridiculous...I can't believe he's not on the untouchable list. Where did you hear that?
I don't see why Rowand would be untouchable. He's probably the player I like most on the Sox, and I'd hate to trade him (relatively young, cheap, and posted a .900+ OPS playing center). But I could see a GM thinking Rowand may have had a career year and trying to sell high. It might be the smart thing to do.

That said, I hope they keep him. I don't want the Sox to start looking like the PGA Seniors Tour.

ChiSoxBobette
11-12-2004, 02:21 PM
[QUOTE=SoxFanTillDeath]I didn't know that. That's ridiculous...I can't believe he's not on the untouchable list. Where did you hear that?[/QUOTE

It was in one of the papers today because they had an article about how the White Sox were after RJ and what they had offered Ariazona last year as well as what was offered supposedly this year.

ChiSoxBobette
11-12-2004, 02:25 PM
[QUOTE=hitlesswonder]I don't see why Rowand would be untouchable. He's probably the player I like most on the Sox, and I'd hate to trade him (relatively young, cheap, and posted a .900+ OPS playing center). But I could see a GM thinking Rowand may have had a career year and trying to sell high. It might be the smart thing to do.

That said, I hope they keep him. I don't want the Sox to start looking like the PGA Seniors Tour.[/QUOTe

Us of all teams should never , NEVER , get rid of a CF like Rowand especially with our team having such bad luck finding a CF and now that we have one we're thinking about getting rid of him , Konerko, Garland & a promising rookie for a 41 year old pitcher.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 02:34 PM
I don't see why Rowand would be untouchable. He's probably the player I like most on the Sox, and I'd hate to trade him (relatively young, cheap, and posted a .900+ OPS playing center). But I could see a GM thinking Rowand may have had a career year and trying to sell high. It might be the smart thing to do.

That said, I hope they keep him. I don't want the Sox to start looking like the PGA Seniors Tour.I've been one of the biggest "trade for RJ" advocates, but this is probably the point at which I would balk. Jon Garland is a nice back-of-the-rotation starter, but guys like that are really pretty replacable. Ditto for Konerko. Players like Rowand are not, which, of course, is exactly why the D-backs would want him.

oldcomiskey
11-12-2004, 02:34 PM
I just read on Chicagosports.com that the Diamondbacks are looking at Konerko, Garland, AND Brian Anderson for Randy Johnson, and it also mentioned that they have said no to a deal right now with the all the negativity going on in their organization thanks to Wally Backman and them losing the Asst. GM.

Forget about RJ. I hope KW isn't dumb enough to give up all three of those players, because it doesn't fix anything on our team. We need another starter, so even if we do get RJ we still will have a problem with the 5 spot. Also, with losing Maggs and (hopefully) Borchard and Reed in the past year, what used to be our deepest position (OF) is now weak...we can't afford trading away another stud outfielder.

I would love RJ in a sox uniform, but he ain't worth the house at 41. Sorry.

Here's the linky. (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-041111soxunit,1,5378867.story?coll=cs-home-headlines)


how exactly is anderson a stud--it wasnt that long ago people said the same about borchard

Foulke You
11-12-2004, 02:38 PM
Ok, I definitely appear in to be in the minority here but I would do Konerko, Garland, and Brian Anderson for Randy Johnson in a New York second. Hear me out before the inevitable flaming begins.

PAUL KONERKO-

In my mind, the only good player you are giving up here is Paulie. And Paulie, god love him, is a one dimensional power hitter and he plays 1B where I believe Ross Gload would be more than adequate. Not to mention, Konerko is also in his final contract year and will probably be playing elsewhere in 2006 anyway.

JON GARLAND-

I'm tired of watching Jon Garland in a Sox uniform never realize his potential. I'm tired of him complaining about Sox fans and blaming teammates for making errors. I want this marshmallow soft pitcher off our team. He is an overvalued #5 with a bad attitude. I would give him a ride to the airport for his flight to Arizona.

BRIAN ANDERSON-

The one player that is making people on this thread say "Is KW nuts?" How many Sox prospects have we waited on that never amount to anything? Think how crazy everyone would have gone if we traded Borchard back in 2001...there would have been an uproar. Now, we would trade him for a box of crackerjack if someone would take him. Anderson may be good, he may not be...I'd spin that roulette wheel for a 1 year shot at the World Series with the Big Unit.

RANDY JOHNSON-

I think people on this thread our grossly undervaluing what this guy brings to the table. The minute Randy Johnson puts on a White Sox uniform, he becomes the best pitcher the team ever had in the last 20 years (with all due respect to Jack McDowell and an aging Steve Carlton and Tom Seaver). Johnson is one of the most dominating pitchers in the game and certainly THE most intimidating pitcher in MLB today. He is 41 yes, but showing no signs of slowing down. He thinks he can pitch for 5 more years and y'know what? The way the guy is throwing, I believe him. The upgrade you would get with Randy Johnson far outweighs the downgrade from Garland to Grilli. I think you could get an 10W-11L, 4.75 ERA season out of Grilli just as Garland would give you.

Ok, I will step down from my soapbox and let the flaming begin.:cool:

mweflen
11-12-2004, 02:50 PM
I would do Konerko for Johnson straight up.

If Johnson can truly pitch for 5 more seasons at somewhere near his prime level, it would be worth it. But giving up pitching to get pitching seems like running in place, and throwing in prospects reeks of the Ritchie deal to me.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 02:53 PM
I would do Konerko for Johnson straight up.

If Johnson can truly pitch for 5 more seasons at somewhere near his prime level, it would be worth it. But giving up pitching to get pitching seems like running in place, and throwing in prospects reeks of the Ritchie deal to me.So I guess trading Timo (RF) for Vlad (RF) is running in place, too?

oldcomiskey
11-12-2004, 02:54 PM
I would do Konerko for Johnson straight up.

If Johnson can truly pitch for 5 more seasons at somewhere near his prime level, it would be worth it. But giving up pitching to get pitching seems like running in place, and throwing in prospects reeks of the Ritchie deal to me.
excuse me sir but are you nuts?

Todd Ritchie couldnt carry RJ's glove

hitlesswonder
11-12-2004, 02:56 PM
I've been one of the biggest "trade for RJ" advocates, but this is probably the point at which I would balk. Jon Garland is a nice back-of-the-rotation starter, but guys like that are really pretty replacable. Ditto for Konerko. Players like Rowand are not, which, of course, is exactly why the D-backs would want him.
I actually agree. I wouldn't do it either, but I'm biased because I like Rowand. I was just saying it's not inconceivable that a reasonable GM would consider trading Rowand. I think Randar would consider it :smile:

mweflen
11-12-2004, 02:59 PM
But PK's going into his contract year, and there's no guarantee he'll be around after this year anyway (and, in fact, in light of the contract they just gave CLee and in light of the fact that the organization appears to be committed to fielding more of a speed/defense/pitching type of team, my guess he's not going to be re-signed anyway). I wouldn't add Anderson to the deal, but I'd sure as hell trade PK and Garland for RJ (although I'd hope they'd still go out and try to find another half-decent starter, like Paul Byrd or Wilson Alvarez or some other low cost option).
I agree that PK is probably destined to leave given money and shifting management philosophy.

But if they traded PK and JG for RJ, I would only be satisfied if they picked up a guy like Jon Lieber to round out the rotation. Then, with a 1-4 of Johnson, Garcia/Buehrle/Lieber, we could either have Contreras be the 5 hole or move him to closer.

mweflen
11-12-2004, 03:02 PM
excuse me sir but are you nuts?

Todd Ritchie couldnt carry RJ's glove
I am not intimating that Ritchie could carry Johnson's glove, jock strap, or anything else. I'm just saying that giving up so much young talent for a guy who may only pitch for a season or two is nuts, just as it was when we got Ritchie, which was nuts for giving up so much young talent for a guy who had 2 good seasons and a plethora of mediocre ones.

hitlesswonder
11-12-2004, 03:06 PM
how exactly is anderson a stud--it wasnt that long ago people said the same about borchardI hope Anderson turns into a great player, but so far all he has is a good A ball year behind him. Baseball Prospectus (not that they're opinion is worth any more than anyone else's) projects him as a 4th outfielder. The player in the deal the Sox would have the hardest time replacing probably would be Garland (if the struggle to find a starter last season is any indication).

I'd be worried about trading young players for an older player too, because the Sox don't appear to have a ton of prospects. But just because Anderson is the Sox best position prospect right now doesn't mean that he's one of the best prospects in baseball. But maybe someone who knows more about the minors could assess him more accurately than me.

Ol' No. 2
11-12-2004, 03:26 PM
I hope Anderson turns into a great player, but so far all he has is a good A ball year behind him. Baseball Prospectus (not that they're opinion is worth any more than anyone else's) projects him as a 4th outfielder. The player in the deal the Sox would have the hardest time replacing probably would be Garland (if the struggle to find a starter last season is any indication).

I'd be worried about trading young players for an older player too, because the Sox don't appear to have a ton of prospects. But just because Anderson is the Sox best position prospect right now doesn't mean he's that he's one of the best prospects in baseball. But maybe somone who knows more about the minors could assess him more accurately than me.I think you've put your finger on the problem. Trying to project from a player's A-ball performance is pretty iffy. Recent experience with Joe Borchard should tell us that. Baseball Prospectus had Borchard rated pretty highly, IIRC. Kenny has a lot more information than we do in the form of coaches' and scouts' reports. The other factor that comes into play is money, as in "Are the D-backs chipping in any to pay for RJ's deferred salary?" If so, that makes a difference, too.

Garland is pretty replacable, and I would hope they would do so rather than count on Grilli for next year. Lieber might be had for $5-6M, and he is at the top of my list. They should have money available to do so. (They'd have a lot more available if they weren't throwing $10M away on Vizquel, but don't get me started on that.) A rotation of Johnson, Garcia, Buehrle, Lieber, Contreras would be one of the best in the AL.

JB98
11-12-2004, 05:46 PM
By the way, I find it funny how before the RJ rumors surfaced everyone was saying how we HAD to get a 5th started because we didn't have anything good enough in house, and now everyone would be happy with Grilli at the 5. Will someone please make up their mind?

My mind is made up. I'm on record as saying we should pursue Derek Lowe to fill out the rotation. Grilli at the 5 is suicidal. Even worse is trading Konerko, Garland and Anderson for RJ. I think Konerko and Garland is too much for a 41-year-old RJ, but to include Anderson is just idiotic.

santo=dorf
11-12-2004, 05:48 PM
My mind is made up. I'm on record as saying we should pursue Derek Lowe to fill out the rotation. Grilli at the 5 is suicidal. Even worse is trading Konerko, Garland and Anderson for RJ. I think Konerko and Garland is too much for a 41-year-old RJ, but to include Anderson is just idiotic.
Lowe is represented by Boras. You know what that means;

:reinsy
"Believe me, I am not part of the problem."

MRKARNO
11-12-2004, 05:58 PM
If they want Anderson, then they can forget about it. Getting RJ would be great, but losing a decent starter, an offensive star and a rising star to get him would be insane. The D-Backs know they got fleeced in the Sexson and Schilling deals, so they are trying to make up for it. Time for KW to explore the big three and Javy Vazquez.