PDA

View Full Version : Questions for Scouting Experts Only


Frater Perdurabo
05-16-2005, 12:11 PM
I'm posting this here because I want to focus on Sox prospects, not the veteran talent the Sox might want to acquire in June or July. I also want to avoid the suggestions of the "jeremyb1-esque" observers who think all or certain Sox prospects are Hall of Fame locks and instead get the objective comments of those who know the Sox farm system well.

Let's say the Sox want to get the best talent available to help them make a World Series run. Let's say Aubrey Huff and/or Roger Clemens (ignore for this moment his statements about teams he is or is not willing to join) are available and moreover have expressed a willigness to come here. We know the Astros or D-Rays would ask for the moon in return, and then drop their demands to Anderson, McCarthy, Sweeney and Gonzalez. Kenny will then have to counter-offer, and hopefully they and Kenny will come to a happy medium.

So, Randar, Daver, Rex, Chisoxfn, maurice, et. al., I ask you these questions:

1. Imagine you are Kenny's Director of Minor League operations. He needs your best advice. Based on your knowledge of their skills, ceilings, and probabilities of reaching their potentials, which White Sox prospects would you be willing to deal for Huff or Clemens? Why?

2. Now, step out of that imagined role and back into reality: What's the happy medium in such a deal? Which White Sox minor leage prospects are Kenny most likely to trade in such a proposed mid-season deal for a player of the calber of Huff or Clemens? Why?

I'm really interested in your honest opinions, analysis and arguments. Otherwise I wouldn't ask.

:smile:

hose
05-16-2005, 12:31 PM
http://www.futuresox.com/

Randar68
05-16-2005, 12:58 PM
1. Imagine you are Kenny's Director of Minor League operations. He needs your best advice. Based on your knowledge of their skills, ceilings, and probabilities of reaching their potentials, which White Sox prospects would you be willing to deal for Huff or Clemens? Why?

2. Now, step out of that imagined role and back into reality: What's the happy medium in such a deal? Which White Sox minor leage prospects are Kenny most likely to trade in such a proposed mid-season deal for a player of the calber of Huff or Clemens? Why?

Well, it really depends. Huff will command nowhere near what Clemens will, yet Clemens is a rent-a-player if he is dealt.

1) I'd only deal McCarthy if an ace-quality pitcher was involved coming our way on a multi-year basis.

Huff? I think some here overvalue him a bit, but I'm not sure I'd go higher than Rogo/Tracey/Diaz/Spidale type players.

I really don't know how to answer your question effectively. Personally, I like the way the team is built with veterans signed to multi-year short-term deals. If we trade away all our top prospects now, we won't have anyone ready to step in 2 years from now when they are all gone.

I know Kenny supposedly has money to toy with if he needs it, and that should help lessen the level of prospects we would have to give up in most deals if we absorbed the $$$-hit. Short of injury or a top-notch stud closer, I just don't see glaring weaknesses that need to be addressed with the kind of talent that would require giving up that kind of prospect. There aren't any GLARING holes in the lineup other than Pauly/Dye right now, but both can't (God I hope) keep hitting like they have been.

On the flip side, if you can get Colorado to throw in some considerable cash into a Todd Helton Deal, I'd be willing to part with some of the higher-level prospects. JMO, but he's a perfect fit in the middle of our order and the #3 hole...

Helton for Konerko (and his 8 million+ salary) and Ryan Sweeney?

Flight #24
05-16-2005, 01:14 PM
Helton for Konerko (and his 8 million+ salary) and Ryan Sweeney?

Randar - this deal has been my #1 hope for a while now. Helton's a perfect fit, and from what I've heard, he's a good team/clubhouse guy as well. Is this at all realistic given his contract?

If so, I'd go as far as Sweeney and a Tracey/Liotta type of guy (and they can have Konerko).

Randar68
05-16-2005, 01:23 PM
Randar - this deal has been my #1 hope for a while now. Helton's a perfect fit, and from what I've heard, he's a good team/clubhouse guy as well. Is this at all realistic given his contract?

If so, I'd go as far as Sweeney and a Tracey/Liotta type of guy (and they can have Konerko).

The problem is, his contract is absolutely ridiculous, including a complete no-trade-clause and his salary escalates to 16+ million for the next 5 or 6 years, with the final garaunteed year at almost 20 million and a team option for 23 million in a year in which he'll be something like 37 or 38 years old?

Colorado is probably going to be happy to get the money off their books if they can, but if the Sox have the prospects to make it worth having them pay a hefty chunk if they're willing. His contract makes it almost impossible to trade him with or without the no-trade clause.

Flight #24
05-16-2005, 01:28 PM
The problem is, his contract is absolutely ridiculous, including a complete no-trade-clause and his salary escalates to 16+ million for the next 5 or 6 years, with the final garaunteed year at almost 20 million and a team option for 23 million in a year in which he'll be something like 37 or 38 years old?

Colorado is probably going to be happy to get the money off their books if they can, but if the Sox have the prospects to make it worth having them pay a hefty chunk if they're willing. His contract makes it almost impossible to trade him with or without the no-trade clause.

That's the issue. The question is whether both sides would find say Konerko+Sweeney+Liotta+Borchard for Helton+$30mil palatable. Helton's annual salaries come down to $11 mil/yr through 2010 and $14 mil in 2011. That's only 2-3mil more than Paulie's making this year. As Helton ages, he can move to DH and replace Frank when he retires in say 3-4 years.

The problem is that that requires the Sox to commit to increasing payroll another 10-15mil for at least a year or 2. That might be doable given the makeup of this team and the fact that KW can point to winning and attendance boosts this year and last year prior to injury hitting. If he can work that, I have to believe Colorado would do that - it's a pretty nice haul for them to go along with payroll reduction.

Randar68
05-16-2005, 01:30 PM
That's the issue. The question is whether both sides would find say Konerko+Sweeney+Liotta+Borchard for Helton+$30mil palatable. Helton's annual salaries come down to $11 mil/yr through 2010 and $14 mil in 2011. That's only 2-3mil more than Paulie's making this year. As Helton ages, he can move to DH and replace Frank when he retires in say 3-4 years.

The problem is that that requires the Sox to commit to increasing payroll another 10-15mil for at least a year or 2. That might be doable given the makeup of this team and the fact that KW can point to winning and attendance boosts this year and last year prior to injury hitting. If he can work that, I have to believe Colorado would do that - it's a pretty nice haul for them to go along with payroll reduction.

Frankly, I'd rather give up Tracey/Diaz/Malone/etc than Liotta, but I agree with that, it could be a good deal. Borchard in Coors? Might be worth the price of admission just to see if he can run into one, LOL!

Flight #24
05-16-2005, 01:40 PM
Frankly, I'd rather give up Tracey/Diaz/Malone/etc than Liotta, but I agree with that, it could be a good deal. Borchard in Coors? Might be worth the price of admission just to see if he can run into one, LOL!

Yeah, Colorado's one team I could see finding decent value in Joe. He could hit 40 there and still only bat .210!

Ol' No. 2
05-16-2005, 01:43 PM
That's the issue. The question is whether both sides would find say Konerko+Sweeney+Liotta+Borchard for Helton+$30mil palatable. Helton's annual salaries come down to $11 mil/yr through 2010 and $14 mil in 2011. That's only 2-3mil more than Paulie's making this year. As Helton ages, he can move to DH and replace Frank when he retires in say 3-4 years.

The problem is that that requires the Sox to commit to increasing payroll another 10-15mil for at least a year or 2. That might be doable given the makeup of this team and the fact that KW can point to winning and attendance boosts this year and last year prior to injury hitting. If he can work that, I have to believe Colorado would do that - it's a pretty nice haul for them to go along with payroll reduction.IMO, the problem with Helton's contract is years more than dollars. Committing that kind of money for a year or two is one thing, but until 2011?

Flight #24
05-16-2005, 01:48 PM
IMO, the problem with Helton's contract is years more than dollars. Committing that kind of money for a year or two is one thing, but until 2011?

Look at it this way: barring a 2003-like year, resigning Paulie is probably going to take at least a 4-year deal. That'll take you through 2010 and cost 8-10mil. Signing any comparable replacement will be similar unless you want to go for more of a journeyman guy like Kevin Millar.

Instead, for another year and a few mil more/yr, you get Todd Helton. You also get some pretty big returns at the gate by adding a big name and significantly enhance your chances of making the playoffs and winning a title. You also have a name guy to center your offense (and marketing) on for a few more years. Short of getting a Clemens-type of pitcher, I don't know that there's a bigger impact guy out there.

About the only possible bigger one would be a true closer like Wagner. But if Hermanson continues to dominate, that might not even be that much of an issue.

Ol' No. 2
05-16-2005, 02:27 PM
Look at it this way: barring a 2003-like year, resigning Paulie is probably going to take at least a 4-year deal. That'll take you through 2010 and cost 8-10mil. Signing any comparable replacement will be similar unless you want to go for more of a journeyman guy like Kevin Millar.

Instead, for another year and a few mil more/yr, you get Todd Helton. You also get some pretty big returns at the gate by adding a big name and significantly enhance your chances of making the playoffs and winning a title. You also have a name guy to center your offense (and marketing) on for a few more years. Short of getting a Clemens-type of pitcher, I don't know that there's a bigger impact guy out there.

About the only possible bigger one would be a true closer like Wagner. But if Hermanson continues to dominate, that might not even be that much of an issue.If it takes a 4 year deal to re-sign PK, then you're right, but I wouldn't offer a 4-year deal, and I'm not convinced that's what it will take. Three years at $8-10M is half the cost of 5 years at $11-14M. If Colorado would pony up the difference, fine, but that would be some kind of record, and I doubt they'd come anywhere close. Even if they tossed in $10M, that would still leave $50M on the books. I wouldn't do it, and I KNOW JR won't.

Flight #24
05-16-2005, 04:04 PM
If it takes a 4 year deal to re-sign PK, then you're right, but I wouldn't offer a 4-year deal, and I'm not convinced that's what it will take. Three years at $8-10M is half the cost of 5 years at $11-14M. If Colorado would pony up the difference, fine, but that would be some kind of record, and I doubt they'd come anywhere close. Even if they tossed in $10M, that would still leave $50M on the books. I wouldn't do it, and I KNOW JR won't.

Your comparison is a bit of apples & oranges since you don't include the cost of a PK replacement after your 3 year deal expires. Not to mention the vast difference in capabilities between the 2 guys.

If all you get is $10mil, then I agree - no way. But I don't believe the Rockies can expect to do that little and get back anything remotely valuable in return. To get rid of Mike Hampton and his ridiculous deal, they took on $52mil in Preston Wilson and Charles Johnson. So maybe $30mil to get one top-caliber prospect, a couple of good ones, and one guy with upside (Borchard) isn't all that farfetched. Sox payroll goes up by $3mil/yr until 2011 as compared to signing PK and an eventual replacement. I'd bet they make that back pretty easily between wins and PR.

Now I don't think it's likely, because the sheer numbers are likely to make management balk. But I do think a deal like this could be structured to be palatable to both sides. And you know KW isn't thinking "I need to add a bench/platoon bat", he's thinking frontline player.

I thought this last year, and I think it again - this is an opportune moment to make some real headway. The team is winning and is well-constructed. The city's beginning to take notice. And the Cubs are fallign apart. All are leading to increased attendance and revenues. Make a big move ala Freddy last year, and barring catastrophic injuries (ala 2004), you can do a lot to turn a mid-market team into a large market team.

Daver
05-16-2005, 04:21 PM
Paul's replacement is playing in Birmingham, his name is Casey Rogowski.

I don't know that Paul will even be offered arbitration after the season if he does not sign a new contract before that for considerably less money than he is making now.

Frater Perdurabo
05-16-2005, 04:28 PM
On the flip side, if you can get Colorado to throw in some considerable cash into a Todd Helton Deal, I'd be willing to part with some of the higher-level prospects. JMO, but he's a perfect fit in the middle of our order and the #3 hole...

Helton for Konerko (and his 8 million+ salary) and Ryan Sweeney?

A top 4 of Pods-Iguchi-Helton-Frank would be downright scary-good.

Randar68
05-16-2005, 04:32 PM
Paul's replacement is playing in Birmingham, his name is Casey Rogowski.

I don't know that Paul will even be offered arbitration after the season if he does not sign a new contract before that for considerably less money than he is making now.

I don't know that the organization has a lot of faith in him, although I do think he changed a few opinions with his play last year.

Randar68
05-16-2005, 04:33 PM
A top 4 of Pods-Iguchi-Helton-Frank would be downright scary-good.

Yep, that is feightening and vastly changes the outlook on offense. All that OBP at the top of the order is unreal, plus power in the 3 and 4 spots and .400+ OBP?

If the 5-7 hitters are even half-way competent, that's a terrifying lineup for pitchers I would think.

Flight #24
05-16-2005, 04:51 PM
Yep, that is feightening and vastly changes the outlook on offense. All that OBP at the top of the order is unreal, plus power in the 3 and 4 spots and .400+ OBP?

If the 5-7 hitters are even half-way competent, that's a terrifying lineup for pitchers I would think.

Add in ARow, Uribe, Everett/Dye, and top it off with Crede & Pierzynski?

:hawk

"Mercy!"

maurice
05-16-2005, 05:08 PM
If Rogo can turn some of those 2B into HR, he'll be in business. He's certainly strong enough.

Randar68
05-16-2005, 05:17 PM
Add in ARow, Uribe, Everett/Dye, and top it off with Crede & Pierzynski?

The amazing thing is, they could put out this lineup:

Pods(LH)
Gooch(RH)
Helton(LH)
Frank(RH)
Carl (Switch)
Crede (RH)
AJ (LH)
Uribe (RH)

It is an apposing manager's worst nightmare in terms of bullpen management!

Not to mention the first 4 guys in that order would combine for a near .400 OBP!

Mohoney
05-16-2005, 06:45 PM
Another question: If you had to give up either Sweeney or Anderson in a trade for an elite starter or closer, which one would it be?

Am I correct in assuming that Anderson has higher value to other clubs? Can I make him the centerpiece of a deal, package him with less depth or one less player, and get the same return I would get if I packaged Sweeney with more depth or one more player?

Daver
05-16-2005, 07:09 PM
Another question: If you had to give up either Sweeney or Anderson in a trade for an elite starter or closer, which one would it be?

Am I correct in assuming that Anderson has higher value to other clubs? Can I make him the centerpiece of a deal, package him with less depth or one less player, and get the same return I would get if I packaged Sweeney with more depth or one more player?

Anderson is a five tool player and a legit CFer, Sweeney is a LFer that would probably be better suited playing first base. Both can hit, but Anderson projects to be a better hitter of the two, Randar would be better able to tell you if one is a better power hitter than the other.

I trade Sweeney first.

Randar68
05-16-2005, 08:18 PM
Anderson is a five tool player and a legit CFer, Sweeney is a LFer that would probably be better suited playing first base. Both can hit, but Anderson projects to be a better hitter of the two, Randar would be better able to tell you if one is a better power hitter than the other.

I trade Sweeney first.

Anderson is more of a sure thing and probably is the better all-around athlete, a true CF'er. Sweeney shows his power potential occassionally, but Sweeney is a right fielder, although I've always been a fan of converting him to first. If Sweeney develops the power potential he has, I think he's a better all-around hitter. That said, Anderson is the better hitter today, plays VERY good defensive CF, and has more power.

One plays a premium position and the other is a question mark to develop the power for either RF or 1st base, where he, IMO is best suited to play defensively.

It's a tough call, but I agree with Daver, I'd probably prefer to trade Sweeney.

Randar68
05-16-2005, 08:18 PM
Another question: If you had to give up either Sweeney or Anderson in a trade for an elite starter or closer, which one would it be?

Am I correct in assuming that Anderson has higher value to other clubs? Can I make him the centerpiece of a deal, package him with less depth or one less player, and get the same return I would get if I packaged Sweeney with more depth or one more player?

In some scouting circles, Sweeney has long been thought to be the better prospect. It depends on who you ask, I suppose.

California Sox
05-16-2005, 09:39 PM
With 3 hits today, Sweeney's hitting .337 as a 20 year-old in AA. I'm not convinced it's a wise idea to trade him.

A. Cavatica
05-16-2005, 09:47 PM
I'm not eager to see Helton come here. Helton is one of the few players whose numbers would decline sharply at USCF, and he is ridiculously expensive. Trading Konerko (and his salary) for Helton (and his salary) is fair without throwing in any grade A prospects.

Randar68
05-16-2005, 11:13 PM
I'm not eager to see Helton come here. Helton is one of the few players whose numbers would decline sharply at USCF, and he is ridiculously expensive. Trading Konerko (and his salary) for Helton (and his salary) is fair without throwing in any grade A prospects.

Helton's numbers would decline going from Coors to one of the 3 other best hitter's parks in baseball?

How's that?

Nobody is eager to trade any of the top prospects, mind you, but Helton, other than his contract is a VERY good if not great hitter.

His 3-year home-away splits:
Home: .380-62-197 (.480 OBP and 1.181 OPS)
Away: .310-33-125 (.422 OBP and .939 OPS)

I don't know about anyone else, but compared to Konerko, Mr. 6-4-3 rally-killer, Mr. Base clogger, and Mr. half-season, he's worth the difference in salary even if he ONLY puts up his road numbers, which is the low end considering The Cell is almost equivalent to Coors.

Chisoxfn
05-17-2005, 12:01 AM
Paul's replacement is playing in Birmingham, his name is Casey Rogowski.

I don't know that Paul will even be offered arbitration after the season if he does not sign a new contract before that for considerably less money than he is making now.
I tend to agree with Dave on this. However I do think they would at least consider arbitration, although it typically hasn't been the Sox MO. However, hopefully someone would ink him prior to the deadline to offer arb and the Sox would end up with draft picks for Paulie.

However, I do not think Rogo is the necessary answer and that they could just as well opt for Josh Fields. With that in mind I don't expect the Sox to just hand the job to a minor leaguer and considering Frank may be vacating the scene as well, you'd at least see a guy like Erubiel Durazo (who I'm a proponent to picking up over the offseason).

As far as trades go this offseason if you want a Huff or Clemens it will cost you and I don't think Kenny would be able to get away from offering one of the Sox top 4 prospects. Teams know what we have and they'll do there best to get one of the best guys out there.

If I were trading I could tell you who I wouldn't deal. Bmac, Liotta, Gio. Of that group Gio would be the first I'd deal. I'd also deal Tracey ahead of all of them, although I'm a huge fan of Tracey because his arm is so stinking good. On top of that he's got a rubber arm and can be a total horse.

That being said in an ideal situation I'd be dealing from AAA. They got absolutely garbage in terms of high ceiling prospects aside from Bmac and Anderson. Diaz, Munoz, Adkins, even Baj (who I happen to like) would all be guys I'd be dealing. However your not going to get any top notch player for them, but I do think you could get yourself a quality reliever (which this team may just need one more of) for one or two of them and maybe a lower level guy.

In close, don't expect the Sox to make any major moves. I think Ozzie likes this team and if they do, you'll see one of the studs go and the rest will be middle level guys. Oh another guy I'd personally deal is Whisler. I like his upside but he's also much more raw than any of them and due to that it makes him more likely to potentially fail (just in my opinion).

From the other side if I were dealing with Kenny and wanted some mid level prospects I'd be looking at Haigwood big time.

Chisoxfn
05-17-2005, 12:05 AM
Anderson is more of a sure thing and probably is the better all-around athlete, a true CF'er. Sweeney shows his power potential occassionally, but Sweeney is a right fielder, although I've always been a fan of converting him to first. If Sweeney develops the power potential he has, I think he's a better all-around hitter. That said, Anderson is the better hitter today, plays VERY good defensive CF, and has more power.

One plays a premium position and the other is a question mark to develop the power for either RF or 1st base, where he, IMO is best suited to play defensively.

It's a tough call, but I agree with Daver, I'd probably prefer to trade Sweeney.
I pretty much agree with both of your assessments. Of the two I'd say Sweeney is more likely to one day win a batting title while Anderson is more likely to consistently hit for 30 HR's. However, I believe Sweeney (upside wise) has the ability to be a better defensive version of Garret Anderson (and thats not a bad thing). I even think he'll have a similar arrival in the sense the first few years he'll be more of an average hitter and will slowly but surely get a little more agressive and start picking and choosing situations to pull (this is what GA is always talking about) and you'll see his power numbers climb.

Safer bet at this point Anderson...although a year ago I'd of told you Sweeney but Anderson has proved me wrong by hitting in AAA (From all I saw of him I thought he still had a little more work to do in AA). I'll gladly be wrong though :)

Frater Perdurabo
05-17-2005, 09:07 AM
Nobody is eager to trade any of the top prospects, mind you, but Helton, other than his contract is a VERY good if not great hitter.

His 3-year home-away splits:
Home: .380-62-197 (.480 OBP and 1.181 OPS)
Away: .310-33-125 (.422 OBP and .939 OPS)

I don't know about anyone else, but compared to Konerko, Mr. 6-4-3 rally-killer, Mr. Base clogger, and Mr. half-season, he's worth the difference in salary even if he ONLY puts up his road numbers, which is the low end considering The Cell is almost equivalent to Coors.

Randar, I tend to agree with you. However, do you think Helton would have any trouble making the switch from the NL to the AL? Put another way, is the AL tougher for hitters than the NL?

Flight #24
05-17-2005, 09:15 AM
I'm not eager to see Helton come here. Helton is one of the few players whose numbers would decline sharply at USCF, and he is ridiculously expensive. Trading Konerko (and his salary) for Helton (and his salary) is fair without throwing in any grade A prospects.

I agree and disagree with you. Anyone's #s will decline from Coors, but as already posted - he's still a topnotch hitter away from home. And in USCF (aka Coors East), he'll put up excellent #s (and batting around Pods-Iguchi-Frank? scary.).

However, given his contract, if the Sox will take it on - they won't have to give back much in terms of prospects. But in that scenario, they won't make the deal because I can't see them taking on 16-19mil/yr through 2011. If you want Colorado to pick up a decent chunk of the deal, you need to send over some talent.

In terms of which talent, obviously BMac is off limits (pitching always is), and I'd say Gio's the next guy I want to keep. Offensively, it's a choice between Anderson & Sweeney. Based on the Sox having Pods & ARow locked in for a while and the relative speed with which Anderson will be coming up, I'd make Sweeney the guy to deal. Barring injury/collapse, the potential slot for him is 1B, and I'll take Helton in a heartbeat.

But it's all most likely moot because that's a big contract and/or a big chunk of change for the Rockies to send over.

maurice
05-17-2005, 11:08 AM
Anderson and Sweeney both are looking good so far this year . . .
- Anderson: .307 / .377 / .555
- Sweeney: .337 / .402 / .410

One significant difference is that Anderson is MLB-ready, while Sweeney still has a ways to go . . . especially in the power department. Given Sweeney's age, frame, and high level of play, he could eventually develop into a better hitter than Anderson (with bonus points for batting lefty), but we'll have to wait and see.

IMHO, Anderson will be starting for the Sox next year (or sooner), and Everett could be at 1B next year.

Randar68
05-17-2005, 12:23 PM
IMHO, Anderson will be starting for the Sox next year (or sooner), and Everett could be at 1B next year.

Brings up an interesting idea...

After the trade dealine for first-year FA-signed players expires, maybe the Sox could package Dye and Konerko for Helton? That would eb the equivalent of half of Konerko's 8+ Million and Dye's 6 million a year next year and remaining 3 this year? Could help with the financial barriers of a deal with Colorado...

Then you could bring up Brian Anderson or move your OF around to get Carl in the line-up every day?

SoxxoS
05-17-2005, 01:15 PM
Brings up an interesting idea...

After the trade dealine for first-year FA-signed players expires, maybe the Sox could package Dye and Konerko for Helton? That would eb the equivalent of half of Konerko's 8+ Million and Dye's 6 million a year next year and remaining 3 this year? Could help with the financial barriers of a deal with Colorado...

Then you could bring up Brian Anderson or move your OF around to get Carl in the line-up every day?

I dont know how Colorado could rationalize trading their best player in franchise history for garbage and half-season garbage in Konerko. That just seems like a complete PR nightmare. There next marketable player after Helton is Clint Barmes.

Randar68
05-17-2005, 01:25 PM
I dont know how Colorado could rationalize trading their best player in franchise history for garbage and half-season garbage in Konerko. That just seems like a complete PR nightmare. There next marketable player after Helton is Clint Barmes.

Yeah, because they're winning so many games?

Getting out from under his contract (or most of it) is reason enough. How did Pittsburg rationalize trading Giles and Kendall? Taking Konerko and Dye is 2 short-term contracts. I didn't say that is all that would be offerred in the trade, I'm sure we'd have to throw in a couple prospects (Rogowski, Tracey, etc) in turn for more money thrown in on their side.

For those saying we can't afford to pick up his contract, how much different is paying Maggs 14 million and Konerko 8 million compared to Helton + Brian Anderson? or Helton + Ryan Sweeney? Or Helton + Pods?

However you care to rationalize it, this organization was willing to make that financial committment to Maggs for 5 years. Helton's a better all-around hitter than Maggs, ferchrissakes, and it ain't close.

Frater Perdurabo
05-17-2005, 01:44 PM
Yeah, because they're winning so many games?

Getting out from under his contract (or most of it) is reason enough. How did Pittsburg rationalize trading Giles and Kendall? Taking Konerko and Dye is 2 short-term contracts. I didn't say that is all that would be offerred in the trade, I'm sure we'd have to throw in a couple prospects (Rogowski, Tracey, etc) in turn for more money thrown in on their side.

For those saying we can't afford to pick up his contract, how much different is paying Maggs 14 million and Konerko 8 million compared to Helton + Brian Anderson? or Helton + Ryan Sweeney? Or Helton + Pods?

However you care to rationalize it, this organization was willing to make that financial committment to Maggs for 5 years. Helton's a better all-around hitter than Maggs, ferchrissakes, and it ain't close.

Holy schnikes! While clearly this is a deeppink fantasy, are you willing to insert yourself into the negotiations with Colorado's GM to make it happen?

Ol' No. 2
05-17-2005, 02:10 PM
Yeah, because they're winning so many games?

Getting out from under his contract (or most of it) is reason enough. How did Pittsburg rationalize trading Giles and Kendall? Taking Konerko and Dye is 2 short-term contracts. I didn't say that is all that would be offerred in the trade, I'm sure we'd have to throw in a couple prospects (Rogowski, Tracey, etc) in turn for more money thrown in on their side.

For those saying we can't afford to pick up his contract, how much different is paying Maggs 14 million and Konerko 8 million compared to Helton + Brian Anderson? or Helton + Ryan Sweeney? Or Helton + Pods?

However you care to rationalize it, this organization was willing to make that financial committment to Maggs for 5 years. Helton's a better all-around hitter than Maggs, ferchrissakes, and it ain't close.I think Colorado would do this or something similar in a heartbeat. But the length of Helton's contract will give any GM pause. He'll be 37 by the time the contract is up, making it very possible they could wind up with big dollars committed to a player who's not producing or not even playing. That's a big risk and probably unnecessary when they've got plenty of good 1B prospects in the minors.

Flight #24
05-17-2005, 02:14 PM
I think Colorado would do this or something similar in a heartbeat. But the length of Helton's contract will give any GM pause. He'll be 37 by the time the contract is up, making it very possible they could wind up with big dollars committed to a player who's not producing or not even playing. That's a big risk and probably unnecessary when they've got plenty of good 1B prospects in the minors.

I don't know....I like the guys we have, but Helton's proven, and is likely to be able to continue to put up #s for at least 3-5 more years, esp if he can shift to DH later on. If you're lucky, the guys you have in the minors right now will put up similar #s to what Helton will in 2009. But none of them's going to help win a title this year or next.

So I'm willing to sacrifice the long-term potential for the short and medium term guarantee. It all hinges on the $$$. If you can get enough back from Colorado, it's a better FA signing than anything the Sox could do after 2005, and you get the 2005 benefit.

Ol' No. 2
05-17-2005, 02:27 PM
I don't know....I like the guys we have, but Helton's proven, and is likely to be able to continue to put up #s for at least 3-5 more years, esp if he can shift to DH later on. If you're lucky, the guys you have in the minors right now will put up similar #s to what Helton will in 2009. But none of them's going to help win a title this year or next.

So I'm willing to sacrifice the long-term potential for the short and medium term guarantee. It all hinges on the $$$. If you can get enough back from Colorado, it's a better FA signing than anything the Sox could do after 2005, and you get the 2005 benefit.But how much cash can you get from Colorado? $10M works out to only $2M a year from 2006-2011. That still makes him pretty pricey and you still have a big risk in the later years.

Flight #24
05-17-2005, 02:47 PM
But how much cash can you get from Colorado? $10M works out to only $2M a year from 2006-2011. That still makes him pretty pricey and you still have a big risk in the later years.

You're right. But in a contract that's got about $100mil remaining, I don't think Colorado expects to get anything back for him if they're only sending $10mil over. In that case, they'll send him to Baltimore where Angelos is reportedly willing to take on the whole deal.

But if they want good prospects, it'll cost them. Mike Hampton was traded and they took on $52mil to make it happen. I have no basis in fact, but I'd guess that giving $30mil in cash+salaries would be reasonable to them in exchange for 1 top prospect and a couple of pretty good ones. If it is only in the $10mil range, then I wouldn't do it unless JR is committing to a very sizeable long term payroll bump.

Randar68
05-17-2005, 02:52 PM
Holy schnikes! While clearly this is a deeppink fantasy, are you willing to insert yourself into the negotiations with Colorado's GM to make it happen?

I don't know what Colorado is currently asking for, but how much money changes hands will have a huge effect on what kind of players they get in return.

It's a ginormous contract and I'm sure Colorado knows they will never get market value for his talent because of that contract.

That said, I'd be willing to do quite a lot to acquire a .330+ - 30 - 120 player who has an OPS that hovers around 1.000 and .440 OBP.

Again, consider what the organization was willing to commit to Ordonez/Konerko, it was over 20 million a year. If you can unload Dye's 18 remaining months and Konerko's half season contract, you end up with a pretty nice financial sheet.

I understand the concerns over paying him when he's 37, but he's a Gold Glove quality first baseman and perennial All-Star. He's also hasn't had a terrible injury history and plays a less demanding position, and get's by on his mechanics and talent rather than physical strength or speed, the quicker aspects to diminish.

Again, I'm very interested to see if they move him, what they get for him and how mauch cash they'll have to give up to do it.

Frater Perdurabo
05-17-2005, 03:07 PM
Again, I'm very interested to see if they move him, what they get for him and how mauch cash they'll have to give up to do it.

Randar, count me as being on board. Need room for a co-pilot on the "bench or trade Paul Konerko club" bandwagon?

That being said, what do you think are the chances we see Helton playing first base at 35th and Shields this season?

Randar68
05-17-2005, 03:37 PM
Randar, count me as being on board. Need room for a co-pilot on the "bench or trade Paul Konerko club" bandwagon?

That being said, what do you think are the chances we see Helton playing first base at 35th and Shields this season?

There's always room on board, but beware, I also started the "Aaron Rowand is a AAAA LF'er" Club, LOL!

The odds? Probably not all that great given the contract and such, so it really should be in deeppink, but the original thread was a total speculation anyhow.

It's nice to have this convo in here without most of the usual spammers filling it up with tripe, LOL!

Frater Perdurabo
05-17-2005, 03:45 PM
There's always room on board, but beware, I also started the "Aaron Rowand is a AAAA LF'er" Club, LOL!

I've been meaning to ask you about that....
:roflmao:

... especially since I was on board with you on that one too, even if I wasn't as vocal about it.
:anon:

It's nice to have this convo in here without most of the usual spammers filling it up with tripe, LOL!

Agreed. I especially love the spam from the resident Konerko and Sox player worshippers, who wouldn't trade Paulie or even a fifth-rate 34 year-old Sox "prospect" straight up for a package of Clemens, Prior, Helton and $100 million. They think just because a player is in the Sox organization, they must be untouchable and HOF-bound.
:kukoo:

Ol' No. 2
05-17-2005, 03:48 PM
A related question:

What is the likelihood that Anderson could produce at the major league level if they brought him up mid-season? No matter how well a guy does in AAA, it's always a risk. If Dye continues to struggle, should they think about finding a way to get Anderson up to see what he can do?

Randar68
05-17-2005, 05:21 PM
A related question:

What is the likelihood that Anderson could produce at the major league level if they brought him up mid-season? No matter how well a guy does in AAA, it's always a risk. If Dye continues to struggle, should they think about finding a way to get Anderson up to see what he can do?

What is "produce?" I think he's a lock to hit .270 if you brought him up today. Every time I think he's going to temporarily struggle with a move up he comes out and hits .320 from start to finish, LOL!

I think his K rate will be high, especially initially, but he has shown to be someone who makes adjustments and makes them quickly. Heck, I'm not convinced Ryan Sweeney isn't a better option today than the Paul Konerko we've been watching stroll to the plate the last 4 weeks.

And hey, moving Dye to give Anderson a shot is all part of my "Trade PK + Dye + Rogo + Tracey + whoever it takes to some degree for Todd Helton" plan. LOL!

Randar68
05-17-2005, 05:24 PM
I've been meaning to ask you about that....
:roflmao:

... especially since I was on board with you on that one too, even if I wasn't as vocal about it.
:anon:


Hey, there are guys who will just out-work their talent, IMO. Rowand proved to be the clear exception, although I don't think he'll ever reproduce the numbers he did last season on a regular basis. When guys can't do things for years in the minors and come all the way to the majors still being unable to do them, you're crazy if you don't have considerable doubt that they ever be able to do them. I give Aaron all the credit in the world. I was wrong, no shame in that. In the game of baseball, evaluating talent and predicting future performance, you're going to be wrong pretty regularly, it shouldn't be a shock when it happens.

Needless to say, Rowands year last year did shock me. My biggest complaint wasn't that people thought he would do well, it was because some irrational people chose to see him on Sportcenter running into walls and think "Hey, this guy is going to be a great player" and that's pretty much all they can say...

Ol' No. 2
05-17-2005, 05:30 PM
What is "produce?" I think he's a lock to hit .270 if you brought him up today. Every time I think he's going to temporarily struggle with a move up he comes out and hits .320 from start to finish, LOL!

I think his K rate will be high, especially initially, but he has shown to be someone who makes adjustments and makes them quickly. Heck, I'm not convinced Ryan Sweeney isn't a better option today than the Paul Konerko we've been watching stroll to the plate the last 4 weeks.As bad as Konerko has looked, he's got a .331 OBP and is on pace for 37 HR and 112 RBI. But Dye has been producing almost nothing. IMO, he'd be a higher priority for replacement, of course assuming he doesn't kick it into gear. Realistically, I wouldn't expect much more from Dye than .270 anyway. How much longer can they tolerate TWO .200 hitters in the lineup?

maurice
05-17-2005, 05:33 PM
There's no reason to think that Rowand can't post several .290 AVE / 20 HR / 20 SB seasons over the rest of his career. I'd be just fine if Anderson matched that kind of production, in addition to solid play in CF (though .300+ AVE / 30+ HR would be nice also).
:cool:

maurice
05-17-2005, 05:34 PM
As bad as Konerko has looked, he's . . . on pace for . . . 112 RBI.

He'd be on pace for 200 RBI (and we'd have a few more wins) if he could hit with RiSP. Pods and Iguchi have been awesome in front of Konerko and Everett . . . and now Rowand.

Ol' No. 2
05-17-2005, 05:48 PM
He'd be on pace for 200 RBI (and we'd have a few more wins) if he could hit with RiSP. Pods and Iguchi have been awesome in front of Konerko and Everett . . . and now Rowand.I'm as frustrated with PK as anyone, but the likelihood is he's going snap out of it and hit better than .200. (How much better I won't hazard a guess.:(:) But at least he's producing something. OTOH, Dye is producing next to nothing. Plus, we have a more nearly major league ready replacement in the minors. How long can we tolerate two .200 hitters in the lineup? At what point do they bring up Anderson and see what he can do?

Randar68
05-17-2005, 05:57 PM
How long can we tolerate two .200 hitters in the lineup? At what point do they bring up Anderson and see what he can do?

I don't know, but Ozzie said he isn't going to bench Pauly...

As for Anderson, when Frank comes back, the situation becomes far more complicated with basically 2 DH's (Frank and Carl) and 4 OF'ers (Rowand/Pods/Dye/Timo and Ozuna makes 6 if you count him)...

Makes for quite the odd combo of bench players, regulars, and semi-regulars. Where the heck does Anderson fit? The only way I see him coming up is if a trade is made.

Randar68
05-17-2005, 06:05 PM
As bad as Konerko has looked, he's got a .331 OBP and is on pace for 37 HR and 112 RBI. But Dye has been producing almost nothing. IMO, he'd be a higher priority for replacement, of course assuming he doesn't kick it into gear. Realistically, I wouldn't expect much more from Dye than .270 anyway. How much longer can they tolerate TWO .200 hitters in the lineup?

How much of Konerko's production was before he went into this 4 week long slump?

He's hitting about ~.183 since April 16th! All that coming out of your cleanup spot? GOOD LORD! 87 AB's, 16 hits(2 HR). His May OPS is .674! That's weak out of your 8th hitter, let alone your fourth.

While he has walked at a higher-than-normal rate, he's also K'd 34 times to 25 walks. Keep in mind, walking Paul Konerko is like putting up a road block on the Dan Ryan.


The biggest issue is Paul Konerko is a cog in the middle of the order you have to depend on. You cannot pay someone what he is payed to be the #4 hitter and absolutely disappear for months at a crack. It's patently unacceptable. Dye was a stop-gap replacement in RF until younger players were ready, as they were not deemed to be. Konerko was depended on to be the rock in the heart of the order.

Ol' No. 2
05-17-2005, 06:06 PM
I don't know, but Ozzie said he isn't going to bench Pauly...

As for Anderson, when Frank comes back, the situation becomes far more complicated with basically 2 DH's (Frank and Carl) and 4 OF'ers (Rowand/Pods/Dye/Timo and Ozuna makes 6 if you count him)...

Makes for quite the odd combo of bench players, regulars, and semi-regulars. Where the heck does Anderson fit? The only way I see him coming up is if a trade is made.I agree. But I don't think you'd pull the trigger on a trade until you were sure Anderson could produce at the major league level. It seems to me the thing to do would be to find a way to bring him up and get him into the lineup on at least a semi-regular basis and see what he can do. Best case, he produces right away, you've got one problem solved and someone becomes trade bait.

Randar68
05-17-2005, 06:07 PM
I agree. But I don't think you'd pull the trigger on a trade until you were sure Anderson could produce at the major league level. It seems to me the thing to do would be to find a way to bring him up and get him into the lineup on at least a semi-regular basis and see what he can do. Best case, he produces right away, you've got one problem solved and someone becomes trade bait.

If he can't produce immediately, you also have Carl. You'd have to shift your lineup around to make room for him on a regular basis, as I don't think Pods-Rowand-Carl Left to right is better than Carl-Pods-Rowand...

Ol' No. 2
05-17-2005, 06:19 PM
If he can't produce immediately, you also have Carl. You'd have to shift your lineup around to make room for him on a regular basis, as I don't think Pods-Rowand-Carl Left to right is better than Carl-Pods-Rowand...All the more reason to bring up Anderson sooner rather than later. It's getting close to the time when they're going to have to start making decisions on mid-season moves, and finding out if he's a viable option is a good first step.

FWIW, I don't disagree with your assessment of Konerko. I just think that Dye is an even bigger drag on the lineup. Plus, IMO it's more likely that Konerko will snap out of it and produce at an acceptable level. Best case, Anderson is productive right away and they trade Dye and Konerko for Helton. (Somehow, even deep pink doesn't do that justice.:cool:)

Daver
05-17-2005, 06:26 PM
All the more reason to bring up Anderson sooner rather than later. It's getting close to the time when they're going to have to start making decisions on mid-season moves, and finding out if he's a viable option is a good first step.

FWIW, I don't disagree with your assessment of Konerko. I just think that Dye is an even bigger drag on the lineup. Plus, IMO it's more likely that Konerko will snap out of it and produce at an acceptable level. Best case, Anderson is productive right away and they trade Dye and Konerko for Helton. (Somehow, even deep pink doesn't do that justice.:cool:)

I highly doubt Kenny will waste an option year for Anderson when their are 4, and possibly 5 outfielders on the roster right now. You can't get a bag of balls for Dye right know, so if an outfielder is going to figure into a midseason trade it would almost have to be Rowand.

I don't see Kenny doing that.

Randar68
05-17-2005, 06:28 PM
I highly doubt Kenny will waste an option year for Anderson when their are 4, and possibly 5 outfielders on the roster right now. You can't get a bag of balls for Dye right know, so if an outfielder is going to figure into a midseason trade it would almost have to be Rowand.

The premise of this pipedream scenario is that Colorado would take Dye's 18 remaining months on contract (in addition to Konerko's expiring deal and whatever prospects and cash) and roll the dice on him instead of sending more cash in a Todd Helton trade.

Daver
05-17-2005, 06:40 PM
The premise of this pipedream scenario is that Colorado would take Dye's 18 remaining months on contract (in addition to Konerko's expiring deal and whatever prospects and cash) and roll the dice on him instead of sending more cash in a Todd Helton trade.

Geez.

Did someone give the Rockies GM job to Danny Evans?

Randar68
05-17-2005, 06:43 PM
Geez.

Did someone give the Rockies GM job to Danny Evans?

They did trade Juan Uribe for the Human Fire Hydrant... LOL!

Seriously though, this is just a minor league/major league speculation thread all the way around. But it's without the real stupid interjections! :D: (although it lacks deeppink in quite a few posts, LOL)

A. Cavatica
05-17-2005, 08:52 PM
Helton's numbers would decline going from Coors to one of the 3 other best hitter's parks in baseball?

How's that?

Nobody is eager to trade any of the top prospects, mind you, but Helton, other than his contract is a VERY good if not great hitter.

His 3-year home-away splits:
Home: .380-62-197 (.480 OBP and 1.181 OPS)
Away: .310-33-125 (.422 OBP and .939 OPS)

I don't know about anyone else, but compared to Konerko, Mr. 6-4-3 rally-killer, Mr. Base clogger, and Mr. half-season, he's worth the difference in salary even if he ONLY puts up his road numbers, which is the low end considering The Cell is almost equivalent to Coors.


Don't get me wrong, I'd love to swap Konerko and Dye for Helton. We need a lefthanded stick, we need OBP, and we sure don't need a couple of expensive .200 hitters.

I'm concerned that Helton has played his entire career in Colorado, and the difference between Coors and USCF is a big one. I didn't do any sophisticated analysis, I just scanned the park factor stats quickly, but I would expect his home runs to drop slightly, his singles to drop more, and his doubles, triples, and overall production to drop precipitously.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor

I'll also admit that I didn't give Helton nearly enough credit. I thought I knew how good a hitter he is, but when I looked at his career stats, they just blew me away. I didn't realize he'd hit 40+ homers twice; I didn't realize his career OBP was .432. He's like a lefthanded, Coors-aided Big Hurt, and he'd be a big improvement over PK even if PK started hitting again.

I also didn't realize he's only 31.

So sign me up for the Helton bandwagon. The package has got to start with Konerko for salary reasons; I'd be willing to include Rowand and one frontline prospect (anyone but B-Mac) if we could get him at an affordable price.

Optipessimism
05-18-2005, 04:04 AM
Geez.

Did someone give the Rockies GM job to Danny Evans?

Paulie usually has a much better second half and Dye should pick it up a bit as well. In this pipedream scenario, KW would already be doing the Rockies a bit of a favor by letting them get out of most of Helton's contract plus I'm sure giving away a top prospect or two. Even if the Rockies ate Konerko's second half salary, I am sure they could send him to a contender with a small payroll for a decent prospect or two. And, if they ate part of Dye's contract, they could do the same thing and actually end up coming out ahead.

If anything were to happen like that, I would expect a third team to get involved somehow. But, just think of it:
Pods LF - Iguchi 2B - Helton 1B - Thomas DH - Rowand RF - Pierzynski C - Crede 3B - Anderson CF - Uribe SS

Flight #24
05-18-2005, 09:31 AM
So sign me up for the Helton bandwagon. The package has got to start with Konerko for salary reasons; I'd be willing to include Rowand and one frontline prospect (anyone but B-Mac) if we could get him at an affordable price.

Yikes! I'm a charter member of this bandwagon, but not at that price! Given the Sox situation with a relatively deep lineup and the attendance boost, it should be doable based primarily on prospects (not named BMac or ideally Anderson) and taking on most of that contract. I stand by my Konerko+Sweeney+mid-level guys for Helton+$20-30mil.

Another option, depending on how confident they are in Frank's health would be a Konerko+Everett+the prospects for Helton+$20mil. Carl could do some damage in Coors, has a reasonable team option for '06 (IIRC, $5mil), and lets you move Dye to the bench for Anderson if he can't pick it up.

Randar68
05-18-2005, 10:52 AM
Yikes! I'm a charter member of this bandwagon, but not at that price! Given the Sox situation with a relatively deep lineup and the attendance boost, it should be doable based primarily on prospects (not named BMac or ideally Anderson) and taking on most of that contract. I stand by my Konerko+Sweeney+mid-level guys for Helton+$20-30mil.

Another option, depending on how confident they are in Frank's health would be a Konerko+Everett+the prospects for Helton+$20mil. Carl could do some damage in Coors, has a reasonable team option for '06 (IIRC, $5mil), and lets you move Dye to the bench for Anderson if he can't pick it up.

I'd much rather keep Carl than Dye, even if he is more of a liability in the field. JMO.

Konerko+Dye+other stuff helps a lot more removing one overpaid OF'er from the already crowded picture.

Knucksie
05-18-2005, 11:44 AM
Weeks ago, I stated somewhere on one of the forums that I had a fear that we may see the PK of a few years ago that only hits half of the year. This comment was in the context of one of the Joe Crede stinks threads. I was belittled as one of those "the sky is falling" posters.


This team is going nowhere with PK producing as he is right now. Question is will he snap out of it for a big second half? I believe he will if we can endure his lack of production in the meantime. The problem is that the pitching, although terrific thus far, can not and will not keep up at the pace they have. We can not expect the pitching to contiue to carry the club while the offense scores 2-3 runs a game. I believe the struggle is yet to come for this team.

I do believe this situation needs to be addressed. Problem is two fold.
1) I'm not so sure that KW and Ozzie will tamper with the chemistry of this team too much (trade) and it would be a real gamble to bring up an Anderson right now. Anderson would have to produce for this club from day one or he gets no PT. If you were willing to wait for him to make adjustments and endure his initial struggles, why make a change to begin with? Besides, if you want to bring up Anderson and give him a few spot starts to see what he can do, who do you send down?

2) If Dye isn't worth a bag of balls right now, what makes anyone think PK is? One possibility is that PK has a history of having a poor half and a great half. Some gm (Colorado?) may believe this will happen. If so, why should we tradfe the guy that is due for a big second half?

I think this is the real paradox of the situation. Let me go a step in a slightly different direction. I think the primary trade bait from the MLB club is Everett. He is not making a big impact on the team and with Frank to return soon, he is expendable. Question is why would Colorado want a player of Everett's ability? He can't play the field, he's not going to make them better (he is just a vetern filler for a club like them). Only chance is just the opportunity for them to dump Helton's salary. However, isn't this a "white flag" trade for Colorado? If so, they will want and need top quality prospects to save face with their fans (same may be said for trading for a Konerko and/or Dye). The only trade option I see for the SOX to trade Konerko, Dye or Everett is to a contending team that needs bench help or an impact. I doubt that such a team would trade a significant player in this type of deal that could help the SOX right now. Usually its veterans for prospects for trades during the season. Contenders aren't going to just swap parts of their line ups.

Bottom line is, as much as I would love to see Helton, it's not going to happen. I also think it is a reach (not impossible) to think and prospect/rookie is going to come in at this point and make an impact, be a difference maker. One exception could be a pitcher that gets a spot because of injury.

Flight #24
05-18-2005, 11:44 AM
I'd much rather keep Carl than Dye, even if he is more of a liability in the field. JMO.

Konerko+Dye+other stuff helps a lot more removing one overpaid OF'er from the already crowded picture.

While I agree with you that Carl is more valuable than Dye, I'd guess Colorado would feel the same way and might be more willing to do a deal with Carl than with Jermaine (or the Sox might be able to get more $$$ in return for dealing him, which IMO is going to be key to any deal).

Frater Perdurabo
05-18-2005, 12:12 PM
However, isn't this a "white flag" trade for Colorado?

It seems to me that a "White Flag" trade is when the team has a winning record and/or is within striking distance of the division or Wild Card, but gives up by trading away its better players. A team that is losing (like the Rockies) would have nothing to lose and everything to gain by re-loading or re-building. Hence, it's not a White Flag.

It also seems to me, based on what I've read here, the Rockies would be willing to deal Helton simply to get out from under his massive contract - much like the Rangers did when they traded Alex Rodriguez and cash for Alfonso Soriano.

The Sox should not trade Carl Everett until they are certain Frank can DH full-time.

As much of a pipedream as this is, IMHO any deal for hitting should wait until after Frank has returned and has had a sufficient number of at-bats to get going.

Knucksie
05-18-2005, 12:53 PM
It seems to me that a "White Flag" trade is when the team has a winning record and/or is within striking distance of the division or Wild Card, but gives up by trading away its better players. A team that is losing (like the Rockies) would have nothing to lose and everything to gain by re-loading or re-building. Hence, it's not a White Flag.


I believe that a white flag trade would be one that signals and end to the current status and re-load or re-build. Whether or not the team has a winning record or not may not be the primary factor (although it was for the Sox when the term "white flag trade" was coined).

Anyway, let's role play...

Fan: "Why did you trade away the most valuable player in our organization?"

GM: "We appreciate all that Todd Helton has done for the Colorado Rockies and wish him the best of luck with his new team. However, while Todd has made significant contributions to the club, we fell it is time for us to re-build this franchise for the future while his trade value was at its highest. In other words, we got a deal we just couldn't pass up. This trade will significantly raise the level of play for the Colorado Rockies in the future."

Fan: "How will this trade help us in the future?"

GM: "Paul Konerko and Jermaine Dye bring great veteran presence to our line up and will be a tremendous influence on our younger players."

Fan: "Wasn't Todd Helton a great veteran presence in our line up?"

GM: "He was. However, not having his lengthy high contract will allow us more room to manuver to acquire other players."

Fan: "What younger players do you have soon to arrive at the major league level and which free agents might you be interested in during the off season?"

GM: "Our minor league system is well stocked with players ready for the major league level. As far as possible free agent acquistions during the off season, I am not at liberty to say at this time due to tampering regulations, but I can say that we will exhaust all options to put the best team on the field in 2006 that we can. No stone will be left unturned."

Fan (thinking): "Sounds like a load of crap to me!"

I remember how angry Sox fans were when Harold Baines was traded to Texas. At least we got young talent in that trade. Could you imagine if they made that swap for another veteran player just to get rid of Baines?

I may be wrong, but this deal just doesn't make sense to me. But hey, stranger things have happened before and maybe a deal could be made. I think it would be more likely that a third team would have to get involved to take a Konerko/Dye/Whoever and throw in the prospects for Colorado. Probably a club that is hovering around .500 trying to get that last piece in place to make a run.

It would seem to me that a deal for Aubrey Huff would be more realistic. If Colorado is/does shop Helton around, it should drive the demand and price for Huff down.

I jst keep thinking that trading Konerko would be too bold of a move for a first place team. Good or bad, he is a cornerstone of this team and I feel they will not try to make this team better by trading him. I doubt addition by subtraction is the answer and I just don't see a swap of MLB first baseman happening.

Flight #24
05-18-2005, 12:59 PM
Anyway, let's role play...

....

It would seem to me that a deal for Aubrey Huff would be more realistic. If Colorado is/does shop Helton around, it should drive the demand and price for Huff down.



As to your scenario, the Rockies response would be that they got a mix of great prospects (the scenarios posed here mostly involve guys like Sweeney, Rogowski, Tracey, Liotta, etc.), solid veterans (Dye, Konerko, Everett), and salary flexibility. They'd say "We weren't winning this year, and this deal accelerates our development so that we can active players for free agents, primarily pitching, and be contenders as early as next year".

And Huff will likely come more expensive than Helton in terms of talent given up simply because he's relatively cheap. Helton's contract is going to drastically limit the potential suitors, in fact its likely that if the Sox are interested, they'd only have to beat out the Orioles in the combination of prospects given up & cash received from Colorado in return.

CWSGuy406
05-18-2005, 04:41 PM
I'm not eager to see Helton come here. Helton is one of the few players whose numbers would decline sharply at USCF, and he is ridiculously expensive. Trading Konerko (and his salary) for Helton (and his salary) is fair without throwing in any grade A prospects.

I know I'm a little late on this, but as Randar alluded to, Helton is not just a Coors-Field player. He has a career OPS+ of 146; OPS+ is park adjusted (where 100 is average).

That contract would be tough to take on, but dang -- if you can get Colorado to take on a little less than half of it -- it would be really hard to pass up.

Randar68
05-18-2005, 04:47 PM
And Huff will likely come more expensive than Helton in terms of talent given up simply because he's relatively cheap. Helton's contract is going to drastically limit the potential suitors, in fact its likely that if the Sox are interested, they'd only have to beat out the Orioles in the combination of prospects given up & cash received from Colorado in return.

Guess I REALLY don't understand Baltimore's interest. They have all the hitting in the world but have a mediocre pitching staff, particularly rotation. Palmiero's there AT LEAST the rest of this year. Sosa is a DH for all intents and purposes given his defensive shortcomings...

What the hell are they gonna do with Todd Helton? That's gonna prevent them from doing anything about their rotation...

Knucksie
05-18-2005, 07:08 PM
As to your scenario, the Rockies response would be that they got a mix of great prospects (the scenarios posed here mostly involve guys like Sweeney, Rogowski, Tracey, Liotta, etc.), solid veterans (Dye, Konerko, Everett), and salary flexibility. They'd say "We weren't winning this year, and this deal accelerates our development so that we can active players for free agents, primarily pitching, and be contenders as early as next year".

And Huff will likely come more expensive than Helton in terms of talent given up simply because he's relatively cheap. Helton's contract is going to drastically limit the potential suitors, in fact its likely that if the Sox are interested, they'd only have to beat out the Orioles in the combination of prospects given up & cash received from Colorado in return.

The most common combination talked about on this forum, I believe, was a deal for Helton involving Konerko or Dye, a prospect or two with Colorado eating a large portion of Helton's salary. In this scenario, I highly doubt KW would part with Konerko, Sweeney and Tracey or Liotta and Rogo wouldn't make sense for the Rockies since they would essentially be recieving two 1b in the deal. Borchard's name may be on the tips of some tongues but it would be a tough sell for the Rockies to believe in him.

In any case I fail to see how the Rockies could profess to gain a "mix of great prospects" and "solid veterans." I don't see the Sox giving that much up for a Helton. Plus, if they (Rockies) were to make the deal happen by throwing in cash, it would be hard to believe that they then are going to turn around and spend money in the off season on free agents of any worth.

I may be all wrong about a deal for Huff. Judging by the game today (only), maybe PK and Dye are starting to turn the corner and if so, all this talk is wasted, premature at the least. Perhaps they (PK and Dye) have been checking out the message boards and got a fire lit under their arses. LOL. Perhaps we should continue with the Crede bashing to get him hot again.

Flight #24
05-18-2005, 08:59 PM
The most common combination talked about on this forum, I believe, was a deal for Helton involving Konerko or Dye, a prospect or two with Colorado eating a large portion of Helton's salary. In this scenario, I highly doubt KW would part with Konerko, Sweeney and Tracey or Liotta and Rogo wouldn't make sense for the Rockies since they would essentially be recieving two 1b in the deal. Borchard's name may be on the tips of some tongues but it would be a tough sell for the Rockies to believe in him.



It's all pure speculation, but most deals discussed here have begun with Ryan Sweeney, who's pretty highly regarded. Add in another lower level guy who's doing pretty well and a solid veteran. The Rockies would get 2 potential young cornerstones, and a guy to plug in from day 1 that they could possibly resign. Oh yeah, and they gain about 70mil in salary flexibility. If necessary, you can basically throw in Borchard as potential upside for them, but he won't be a major portion, just a sweetener.

Their primary desire is to shed the contract. Early rumors are that they might consider getting marginal prospects from Baltimore in exchange for Angelos taking on the entire deal (and Randar - I believe Angelos' point is to add a marquee name to fend off the encroachment by the Nats on his attendance). The question is whether they'd give a chunk of $$ in exchange for much better return in terms of prospects. The way baseball works today, their choices are to get max $$$ flexibility, or to give p some of that and get prospects. You can't get both unless you find a real chump to trade with.

As for the Rockies, their problem isn't so much that they need to reduce payroll, it's that they can be more competitive by spreading Helton's $$$ around to a couple of players. For example, this offseason, they could have gotten Matt Clement and a solid hitter for the $16mil Helton will make. And then you add in a potential stud hitter in Sweeney and a longshot who could pan out in Coors like Borchard. It's basically the recipe the Sox used this offseason in the C.Lee deal.

delben91
05-18-2005, 09:18 PM
There's always room on board, but beware, I also started the "Aaron Rowand is a AAAA LF'er" Club, LOL!



I won't hijack this thread from its intended purpose too much, but I saw this and all the debates with the FOC came flooding back. I was definitely with Randar on this one, with maybe 2 or 3 other posters. I'm thrilled to be proven wrong, but just goes to show that there are always those players that don't fit any given "track" to the majors.

With that, I shall step aside and allow the pipedreaming to continue... :D:

Ol' No. 2
05-19-2005, 02:35 PM
Yikes! I'm a charter member of this bandwagon, but not at that price! Given the Sox situation with a relatively deep lineup and the attendance boost, it should be doable based primarily on prospects (not named BMac or ideally Anderson) and taking on most of that contract. I stand by my Konerko+Sweeney+mid-level guys for Helton+$20-30mil.

Another option, depending on how confident they are in Frank's health would be a Konerko+Everett+the prospects for Helton+$20mil. Carl could do some damage in Coors, has a reasonable team option for '06 (IIRC, $5mil), and lets you move Dye to the bench for Anderson if he can't pick it up.I don't think there's EVER been a trade involving so much cash. Not even close.

Flight #24
05-19-2005, 02:51 PM
I don't think there's EVER been a trade involving so much cash. Not even close.

IIRC, the Mike Hampton deal involved a bunch of cash going from Florida to Atlanta (although they saved $$ by sending Preston Wilson & CJ to the Rockies). EDIT: See here (http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/news/021116hampton.html). Looks like $36mil of his deal was paid by Colorado & Florida. So sending $25-30mil with Helton would be considered a mere pittance!

In an interesting coincidence, Pablo Ozuna was ivolved in that deal, going from Florida to Colorado!

Also, didn't the original ARod to the BoSox deal involve a fairly large sum of $$$ going to Beantown from Hicks? That was commish-approved. I believe that unless it's a straight out purchase of a contract, a deal like this is likely to be approved. If not, I would think JR could put in a call to his Bud.

Ol' No. 2
05-19-2005, 03:24 PM
IIRC, the Mike Hampton deal involved a bunch of cash going from Florida to Atlanta (although they saved $$ by sending Preston Wilson & CJ to the Rockies). EDIT: See here (http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/news/021116hampton.html). Looks like $36mil of his deal was paid by Colorado & Florida. So sending $25-30mil with Helton would be considered a mere pittance!

In an interesting coincidence, Pablo Ozuna was ivolved in that deal, going from Florida to Colorado!

Also, didn't the original ARod to the BoSox deal involve a fairly large sum of $$$ going to Beantown from Hicks? That was commish-approved. I believe that unless it's a straight out purchase of a contract, a deal like this is likely to be approved. If not, I would think JR could put in a call to his Bud.In the Hampton deal they paid $11M in salary. The other $19M was a signing bonus that they had already incurred, but which was deferred. I'd forgotten about the A-Rod deal. That involved something like $20M in cash, IIRC. It's not a question of being approved by Selig. It's just that teams aren't often willing to part with that much cash all at once. Maybe they could structure it like the Contreras deal in which they pay part of his salary each year instead of a boatload of cash upfront.

Flight #24
05-19-2005, 03:41 PM
In the Hampton deal they paid $11M in salary. The other $19M was a signing bonus that they had already incurred, but which was deferred. I'd forgotten about the A-Rod deal. That involved something like $20M in cash, IIRC. It's not a question of being approved by Selig. It's just that teams aren't often willing to part with that much cash all at once. Maybe they could structure it like the Contreras deal in which they pay part of his salary each year instead of a boatload of cash upfront.

That contradicts BA's recap of the deal. The Braves now are on the hook for $48.5 for six years of Hampton, with the Marlins paying $23.5 million of his 2003-05 salaries and the Rockies contributing $6.5 million over the same period. Colorado also paid $6 million to buy out Hampton's $20 million option for 2009.

So the Rockies paid $12.5mil including the 2009 buyout. The Marlins paid $23.5mil. If $19 of that was a deferred signing bonus, they paid it despite not incurring it. In fact BA phrases is as them paying part of his salary (ala the Contreras deal).

It's possible that they have it wrong, but the rumored Helton deal would be fairly similar to how BA recaps the Hampton deal. Colorado pays a portion of Todd's salary and some/all of his buyout and receives players in return.

Ol' No. 2
05-19-2005, 04:38 PM
That contradicts BA's recap of the deal.

So the Rockies paid $12.5mil including the 2009 buyout. The Marlins paid $23.5mil. If $19 of that was a deferred signing bonus, they paid it despite not incurring it. In fact BA phrases is as them paying part of his salary (ala the Contreras deal).

It's possible that they have it wrong, but the rumored Helton deal would be fairly similar to how BA recaps the Hampton deal. Colorado pays a portion of Todd's salary and some/all of his buyout and receives players in return.Ow!! Trying to make sense out of all that money flying around everywhere is making my head hurt.

Knucksie
05-19-2005, 06:25 PM
As to your scenario, the Rockies response would be that they got a mix of great prospects (the scenarios posed here mostly involve guys like Sweeney, Rogowski, Tracey, Liotta, etc.), solid veterans (Dye, Konerko, Everett), and salary flexibility. They'd say "We weren't winning this year, and this deal accelerates our development so that we can active players for free agents, primarily pitching, and be contenders as early as next year".

I don't see the Sox sending Konerko, Sweeney, and a Tracey to Colorado for Helton and cash. Therefore the spiel about a mix of great prospects and solid veterans goes down the tubes.

In the scenario that Colorado would throw in, say $30, while at the same time taking on Konerko's contract, I fail to see how this would give them payroll flexibility. What is the status of Konerko's contract? How many7 years does he have left? If it ends this year, them they would be sending out their best player and $30 mil for a half a year rent-a-player. That would necessitate them either re-signing him (probably at an increased salary) to have a veteran holdover from the trade or take that money and search for someone to replace him. That is assuming they don't have anyone they think is major league ready which if they did, why wouldn't they bring the kid up at mid year for some experience and not incur Konerko's salary?

IMHO, I just don't see the Rockies taking a veteran like Konerko in a deal for Helton and cash. It would defeat the purpose of reducing the payroll. I also don't see KW giving that much up for Helton.

Now, a deal of prospects (Sweeney, Rogo, Tracey) for Helton and cash I could see as a possibility, but I just fail to see how either side would include Konerko in a deal such as this. Maybe Konerko and A prospect for Helton and some cash, not $30 mil.

Just my opinion though.

mdep524
05-19-2005, 07:56 PM
I don't see the Sox sending Konerko, Sweeney, and a Tracey to Colorado for Helton and cash. Therefore the spiel about a mix of great prospects and solid veterans goes down the tubes.

In the scenario that Colorado would throw in, say $30, while at the same time taking on Konerko's contract, I fail to see how this would give them payroll flexibility. What is the status of Konerko's contract? How many7 years does he have left? If it ends this year, them they would be sending out their best player and $30 mil for a half a year rent-a-player. That would necessitate them either re-signing him (probably at an increased salary) to have a veteran holdover from the trade or take that money and search for someone to replace him. That is assuming they don't have anyone they think is major league ready which if they did, why wouldn't they bring the kid up at mid year for some experience and not incur Konerko's salary?

IMHO, I just don't see the Rockies taking a veteran like Konerko in a deal for Helton and cash. It would defeat the purpose of reducing the payroll. I also don't see KW giving that much up for Helton.

Now, a deal of prospects (Sweeney, Rogo, Tracey) for Helton and cash I could see as a possibility, but I just fail to see how either side would include Konerko in a deal such as this. Maybe Konerko and A prospect for Helton and some cash, not $30 mil.

Just my opinion though. I think you're missing the point of including Konerko in the deal from the Rockies' end. At its essence, any Helton deal accomplishes two things for the Rockies: a.) it reduces payroll/allows flexibility (a la ARod's departure from Texas) and b.) it stocks the Rockies with some prospects that could help them compete in the long term.

Acquiring Konerko (in a Konerko + 2 prospects for Helton + cash deal) advances both these objectives. Konerko's contract is up after this season; there is a chance the Rockies would take on Konerko long term, but its more likely they would turn him right around and trade him again at the deadline to a contender for more prospects. (A week or two hitting at Coors certainly wouldn't do anything but help his stock.) Consider Konerko an "asset" to the Rockies as opposed to a player meant to replace Helton.

So, ultimately the Rockies would end up with a prospect or two from the Sox, a prospect or two from their second Konerko deal, and increased payroll flexibility from Helton's departure. Not too bad.

Randar68
05-19-2005, 08:20 PM
Now, a deal of prospects (Sweeney, Rogo, Tracey) for Helton and cash I could see as a possibility, but I just fail to see how either side would include Konerko in a deal such as this. Maybe Konerko and A prospect for Helton and some cash, not $30 mil.

1) This is all utter pipedream speculation
2) As was previously stated, you're utterly missing the point by a mile
3) No way the Sox could trade for Helton without dumping Konehead at the same time.

Konerko and/or Dye are free-bies. Teams look to take on expiring contracts in lieu of cash all the time. If they turn around and re-trade Konerko, they get more prospects, if they keep him, it's possible they could offer him arbitration and end up with 2 high draft picks (a la more prospects) depending on how he finishes the year)...

Meanwhile, it's better to have 70 million extra in the bank over the next 7 years to help rebuild the team all-around than the equivalent of 0 that they have now due to being committed to 100+ million or so to 1 player while they're perhaps the worst team in baseball (the NL at least)....

Flight #24
05-20-2005, 09:28 AM
I don't see the Sox sending Konerko, Sweeney, and a Tracey to Colorado for Helton and cash. Therefore the spiel about a mix of great prospects and solid veterans goes down the tubes.



Konerko was just an option in lieu of more cash. So maybe it's $25k+Konerko v. $30k. That gives the Rockies someone to put at 1B through this year and someone that they could probably resign at his current $8mil or even less depending on how he bounces back from his slow start. Or as noted, they could re-trade him or take the comp picks for letting him walk.

As for the Sox, with ARow & Podsednik, they only have 1 OF slot, and a plethora of options beginning with Anderson. Sweeney could move to 1B, but if you acquire Helton that becomes unnecessary. Tracey's behind at least McCarthy and Gio so is also somewhat expendable for the Sox given they have Buehrle & Garcia for 3 years and Contreras, Garland, Hernandez for 2 (and are IMO likely to resign Garland).