PDA

View Full Version : Williams deal with the Reds gets the thumbs down


Pages : [1] 2

brewcrew/chisox
08-03-2005, 12:07 PM
The Score's Offmann just reported that Ownership (Reds ownership or Jerry...couldn't decipher who) squashed the deal the week before the deadline. Probably Griffey and Casey. Griffey as DH...man, that would have been sweet.

Dick Allen
08-03-2005, 12:10 PM
The Score's Offmann just reported that Ownership (Reds ownership or Jerry...couldn't decipher who) squashed the deal the week before the deadline. Probably Griffey and Casey. Griffey as DH...man, that would have been sweet.I believe it was the Reds owner who nixed the deal. Ofman also speculated it may have been Adam Dunn. Either way, it was a strong lefty bat that KW supposedly had in the bag.

GAsoxfan
08-03-2005, 12:12 PM
Who would the Sox have given up?

Dick Allen
08-03-2005, 12:14 PM
Who would the Sox have given up?They didn't mention, at least while I was listening.

santo=dorf
08-03-2005, 12:14 PM
Supposedly Bob Nightengale said the White Sox and Reds agreed to a trade for Chris Young, Rogo and a prospect for Griffey. The Reds owners shot it down because KW and the Reds' GM agreed that $4.5 million of his annual $13 million salary would be paid by the Reds.

Are the whiners satisfied now?

I thought Griffey makes $6 million a year unntil 2024. :?:

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 12:15 PM
biggest disappointment there is that Griffey's the prime waiver trade candidate, and if this report is true, we had trouble getting him before....

hopefully it was Dunn and we can still get Griffey.

SoxSpeed22
08-03-2005, 12:15 PM
Enjoy losing, Cincinatti.

Heffalump
08-03-2005, 12:16 PM
Supposedly Bob Nightengale said the White Sox and Reds agreed to a trade for Chris Young, Rogo and a prospect for Griffey. The Reds owners shot it down because KW and the Reds' GM agreed that $4.5 million of his annual $13 million salary would be paid by the Reds.

Are the whiners satisfied now?

I thought Griffey makes $6 million a year unntil 2024. :?:


Yeah, I heard three propsects for Griffey.....No names given though.

I also heard Sean Burroughs for Joe Borchard rumor, but with Blum here, that is probably 100% BS now.

Brian26
08-03-2005, 12:18 PM
Wow, that's huge. I know a lot of people are really, really high on Chris Young though. It would have been nice to pick up Jr. without giving up Marte or BMac though.

Ol' No. 2
08-03-2005, 12:22 PM
Supposedly Bob Nightengale said the White Sox and Reds agreed to a trade for Chris Young, Rogo and a prospect for Griffey. The Reds owners shot it down because KW and the Reds' GM agreed that $4.5 million of his annual $13 million salary would be paid by the Reds.

Are the whiners satisfied now?

I thought Griffey makes $6 million a year unntil 2024. :?:The Reds have to be complete nincompoops to pass on this deal.

samram
08-03-2005, 12:24 PM
Enjoy losing, Cincinatti.

No kidding. Teams like Cincy and TB just don't get it. You either have to spend or develop. It sounds like the Reds had a chance to bring in two good prospects, but decided to keep a guy who will never help them win (not because he's bad, but because they have no pitching). Same thing Lamar may have done.

IIRC, the 51% of the Reds is being sold. There may be an agreement that a transaction like this is not to be entered into as a condition of sale.

Rocklive99
08-03-2005, 12:31 PM
It mightve been Ryan Freel for a 'geoff blum' like role, but there's no way theyre giving him up

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 12:33 PM
Supposedly Bob Nightengale said the White Sox and Reds agreed to a trade for Chris Young, Rogo and a prospect for Griffey. The Reds owners shot it down because KW and the Reds' GM agreed that $4.5 million of his annual $13 million salary would be paid by the Reds.

Are the whiners satisfied now?

I thought Griffey makes $6 million a year unntil 2024. :?:

Technically, it's $12mil/yr with $6 deferred. So basically the Sox would pay all of the deferrals and only 1.5mil of his salary through 2008.

That's a great deal for the Reds. They shed 63% of their financial obligation and get a very very good prospect, another decent prospect, and a throw-in? The Reds GM should have been dancing in the streets to get that type of deal.

downstairs
08-03-2005, 12:42 PM
WSCR just clarified.

It was for Griffey. We'd send 3-ish prospects. Reds turned it down, but both teams may revisit this month in a waiver deal.

TAKE IT KENNY!

NSSoxFan
08-03-2005, 12:46 PM
WSCR just clarified.

It was for Griffey. We'd send 3-ish prospects. Reds turned it down, but both teams may revisit this month in a waiver deal.

TAKE IT KENNY!

I'm wondering if Griffey would be able to pass through waivers.

dickallen15
08-03-2005, 12:47 PM
Yeah, I heard three propsects for Griffey.....No names given though.

I also heard Sean Burroughs for Joe Borchard rumor, but with Blum here, that is probably 100% BS now.

Considering Blum came from the same team Burroughs would be coming from, it could actually have been part of the trade agreement.

samram
08-03-2005, 12:47 PM
WSCR just clarified.

It was for Griffey. We'd send 3-ish prospects. Reds turned it down, but both teams may revisit this month in a waiver deal.

TAKE IT KENNY!

I'm sure KW would do it if Griffey falls that far, which he won't since the Yankees could really use him (although they probably can't trade for him since they have few marketable players), and no one wants the Sox to get even better.

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 12:48 PM
I'm wondering if Griffey would be able to pass through waivers.

The only teams I see taking the chance are the Spankees and Cubs. Spanks have been looking for a CF, and don't mind paying the salary. Especially with Bernie coming off the books. Cubs similarly won't have Sosa's payment to the O's on the books, and need a CF. But per the Trib, they may be more likely to look at some of their younger players.

I don't see anyone else risking taking on that whole salary.

Mickster
08-03-2005, 12:48 PM
I'm wondering if Griffey would be able to pass through waivers.

in about a nonosecond.

Ol' No. 2
08-03-2005, 12:51 PM
The only teams I see taking the chance are the Spankees and Cubs. Spanks have been looking for a CF, and don't mind paying the salary. Especially with Bernie coming off the books. Cubs similarly won't have Sosa's payment to the O's on the books, and need a CF. But per the Trib, they may be more likely to look at some of their younger players.

I don't see anyone else risking taking on that whole salary.Every other team in MLB would have to pass on Griffey before he'd fall to the Sox. I can't believe that would happen.

nodiggity59
08-03-2005, 12:52 PM
Whoever said Griffey would pass in a nanosecond is right on. Cmon people, the Yanks wouldn't sign Beltran in his prime but they'd take ALL of Griffey's contract when Griffey is past his prime and injury prone?

No one, no one, will put in a claim for Griffey. Though it still is up to KW to get the deal done. And this time he may have competition.

samram
08-03-2005, 12:53 PM
Every other team in MLB would have to pass on Griffey before he'd fall to the Sox. I can't believe that would happen.

Same here. I also wonder if Boston would take a chance, with the thought of either letting Damon go this offseason, or trading Ramirez during the offseason, resigning Damon, and playing Damon in left where his arm wouldn't be as big a detriment. They have the money to pay Griffey and Manny for the rest of the season.

I think the possibility could be even greater if Nixon is out for a while.

OzzieBall2005
08-03-2005, 12:54 PM
How in the heck did Walker fall to the Cards last August? I am sure there were teams willing to block that deal just like there are teams willing to block Jr. to the SOX.

nodiggity59
08-03-2005, 12:55 PM
Same here. I also wonder if Boston would take a chance, with the thought of either letting Damon go this offseason, or trading Ramirez during the offseason, resigning Damon, and playing Damon in left where his arm wouldn't be as big a detriment. They have the money to pay Griffey and Manny for the rest of the season.

I think the possibility could be even greater if Nixon is out for a while.

They may want Griffey and be willing to deal for him, but claim him on waivers?:?:

samram
08-03-2005, 12:58 PM
They may want Griffey and be willing to deal for him, but claim him on waivers?:?:

Yes. When he's put on waivers, any team that claims him can try to make a trade. Or the waiving team can pull him off waivers or let him go to the claiming team. I think Boston is financially able to handle his salary. I have no clue if they're actually interested. I just thought it made sense.

nodiggity59
08-03-2005, 01:01 PM
Yes. When he's put on waivers, any team that claims him can try to make a trade. Or the waiving team can pull him off waivers or let him go to the claiming team. I think Boston is financially able to handle his salary. I have no clue if they're actually interested. I just thought it made sense.

Okay. And it's JMO that no one would risk taking the whole deal, even if they could technically absorb it w/ a $125+ payroll. But of course BoSox could have interest in a deal where they received cash.

Jjav829
08-03-2005, 01:05 PM
So that was the deal KW was referring to. Young, Rogo and another prospect for Griffey and cash? Nice deal, KW! Try it again and hopefully Lindner comes to his senses and allows the deal to go through this time. I'm guessing Griffey was indeed out of the lineup Sunday because the deal was still on the table at that time, though ultimately it was killed by Linder.

Apparently there are shares of the Reds that are currently up for sale. Perhaps if that gets resolved soon, they will re-think this deal and we can still land Griffey. I think he will probably get through waivers, though I do wonder how this rumor will effect a possible trade. Perhaps a team that wouldn't have claimed Griffey before will now put in a claim simply to block a potential deal to the Sox. I hope Griffey is among the first batch of Reds players to get put on waivers so we'll know something very soon.

Soxzilla
08-03-2005, 01:06 PM
With Thomas likely done for his career...and even moreso that he is done with the White Sox. Picking up a guy like Griffey Jr. would be fantastic...I'd cream myself, in fact.

I'm surprised Jerry would even give this thing the green light, must be because of the deferred money. You know how he loves not paying straight up.:wink:

I wonder how Hangar would respond to this deal...

PatK
08-03-2005, 01:06 PM
How in the heck did Walker fall to the Cards last August? I am sure there were teams willing to block that deal just like there are teams willing to block Jr. to the SOX.

Larry Walker had a pretty big salary, and only St. Louis was willing to pick it up, basically.

JB98
08-03-2005, 01:07 PM
I'm wondering if Griffey would be able to pass through waivers.

My feeling is he would because of his salary. To me, the Yankees would be the only team that might put in a claim. Hasn't Griffey said, though, that he wouldn't want to play in New York? Or am I thinking of someone else?

If we can pick up a hitter like that for the stretch drive for nothing but prospects, it would be outstanding.

Rocklive99
08-03-2005, 01:07 PM
Wow, I'm sure he'd get through (I guess the other teams in the AL Central could try to block it, but then wouldn't they have to take his contract?), GITRDONE! It'd be the perfect deal for Griffey as he would finally be able to DH and not worry about injury when playing defense, and he could probably pay OF if Pods needed rest or if extreme situations called for it

Jjav829
08-03-2005, 01:08 PM
How in the heck did Walker fall to the Cards last August? I am sure there were teams willing to block that deal just like there are teams willing to block Jr. to the SOX.

He was owed $17 million over the final two years of his deal. Given his age, recent injuries, and rumors of his potential requirement, it's not too surprising that he wasn't claimed. I think the game could happen with Griffey.

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 01:09 PM
Every other team in MLB would have to pass on Griffey before he'd fall to the Sox. I can't believe that would happen.

Who has a) a need in CF & b)$$$ to take on the salary & c)the desire to take on an aging former star?

That's a short list. By my count, teams that could afford Griff are: Yanks, Boston, LAA, Baltimore, Cubs, LAD. Of those, Boston and Baltimore need pitching a lot more than hitting., and I'm not convinced that the Cubs, Dodgers, or Angels will add that salary, they'd prefer to try and trade for him and reduce it (like the Sox). Yanks have the luxury tax issues.

Randar68
08-03-2005, 01:11 PM
Technically, it's $12mil/yr with $6 deferred. So basically the Sox would pay all of the deferrals and only 1.5mil of his salary through 2008.

That's a great deal for the Reds. They shed 63% of their financial obligation and get a very very good prospect, another decent prospect, and a throw-in? The Reds GM should have been dancing in the streets to get that type of deal.

And here is the real deal. The deferrals from previous years are no longer on the table. Those are parts of the contractual agreements in place in the previous year.

It's 12 Million/year with 6 of it deferred starting to be paid out in 2009. The Sox would be responsible for the pro-rated deferred portions of this contract. I'd really like to see the Sox take all the remaining money and pull Chris Young out of that deal and Git 'er Done.

I've been wanting them to pick up Griffey since late May...

Mickster
08-03-2005, 01:12 PM
Perhaps a team that wouldn't have claimed Griffey before will now put in a claim simply to block a potential deal to the Sox. I hope Griffey is among the first batch of Reds players to get put on waivers so we'll know something very soon.

If a team does claim him (simply to block another from making a potential deal), then they have to realize that they could be on hook for the entire deal (including all deferrals) if Cincy decides to let him go for nothing. This is the reason why I thing we will not see these types of "blocks" when speaking of Griffy on waivers.

Randar68
08-03-2005, 01:15 PM
Who has a) a need in CF & b)$$$ to take on the salary & c)the desire to take on an aging former star?

That's a short list. By my count, teams that could afford Griff are: Yanks, Boston, LAA, Baltimore, Cubs, LAD. Of those, Boston and Baltimore need pitching a lot more than hitting., and I'm not convinced that the Cubs, Dodgers, or Angels will add that salary, they'd prefer to try and trade for him and reduce it (like the Sox). Yanks have the luxury tax issues.

In addition to this, once a player passes through waivers, then any deal can be worked out without having to go through the waiver process. Few teams will claim the waiver-wire players like Griffey unless they have a deal in place with the club already or have caught wind of a rival readying to do so...

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 01:16 PM
I'd hate to see Young go in this deal.

Jjav829
08-03-2005, 01:17 PM
If a team does claim him (simply to block another from making a potential deal), then they have to realize that they could be on hook for the entire deal (including all deferrals) of Cincy decides to let him go for nothing. This is the reason why I thing we will not see these types of "blocks" when speaking of Griffy on waivers.

Exactly, but a few teams could be willing to do so, most notably the Yankees. They still have big issues in center field this year. They just declined the option on Bernie Williams for next year so that opens up a bit of cash. Obviously a team like the A's, Twins, etc. won't be able to block a deal. But a team like the Angels or Yankees could potentilly do so. The Angels have a need at DH and Arte Moreno has shown a willingness to spend the money. They could claim Griffey and use a rotation of their four OFs taking turns at DH. The Yankees could claim him just to have a legitimate CF. I think both of these teams could be willing to put in a claim, though as I said, I think ultimately Griffey will make it through waivers unclaimed.

Rocklive99
08-03-2005, 01:17 PM
Okay, this is July 30th type excitement again for me, how soon can this happen? There's a date right?

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 01:17 PM
And here is the real deal. The deferrals from previous years are no longer on the table. Those are parts of the contractual agreements in place in the previous year.

It's 12 Million/year with 6 of it deferred starting to be paid out in 2009. The Sox would be responsible for the pro-rated deferred portions of this contract. I'd really like to see the Sox take all the remaining money and pull Chris Young out of that deal and Git 'er Done.

I've been wanting them to pick up Griffey since late May...

Agreed 100%. In fact, if that's the case, simply claim him on waivers!

Seriously, you can look at it this way: You add Griffey's $6mil and replace Carl's $4.5+Shingo's $2.5. He can DH for you. You take Frank's $8 & Timo's $1 to subsidize the raises to players under contract. Then you can resign Paulie and use any payroll bump to cover Garland & AJ's raises, or you can let Paulie go. Anderson replaces Timo as 4th OF and/or platoon starter similar to how Carl was being used in the OF this year when Frank was back.

santo=dorf
08-03-2005, 01:19 PM
Larry Walker was traded from the Rockies which meant every NL passed over him which led to the Cards trading for him. With Griffey he would have to get passed up by every NL team first, and then by every AL team.

Madvora
08-03-2005, 01:19 PM
The good thing is that a hell of a lot more teams will really be out of the race this time, so they won't have any reason to claim Griffey. Also, every team in the AL Central is out of it. I don't think they'll have any reason to do any blocking either.

There are fewer that are still in races, so we still have a chance.

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 01:20 PM
Agreed 100%. In fact, if that's the case, simply claim him on waivers!

Seriously, you can look at it this way: You add Griffey's $6mil and replace Carl's $4.5+Shingo's $2.5. He can DH for you. You take Frank's $8 & Timo's $1 to subsidize the raises to players under contract. Then you can resign Paulie and use any payroll bump to cover Garland & AJ's raises, or you can let Paulie go. Anderson replaces Timo as 4th OF and/or platoon starter similar to how Carl was being used in the OF this year when Frank was back.

Anything that includes resigning Konerko doesn't interest me.

Jjav829
08-03-2005, 01:20 PM
Okay, this is July 30th type excitement again for me, how soon can this happen? There's a date right?

Three days after he is placed on waivers, he clears. So if the Reds put Griffey on waivers Monday, then a deal could realistically happen tomorrow. I know what you mean though. This is like the deadline all over again. This time I'm not getting my hopes up. If Lindner allows Griffey to be traded, I think Kenny will get it done. But I'm not optimistic of Lindner having a sudden change of heart.

Randar68
08-03-2005, 01:21 PM
Okay, this is July 30th type excitement again for me, how soon can this happen? There's a date right?

Once he clears waivers, the Reds would be free to negotiate a deal and trade him. I don't know what that date is, frankly.

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 01:22 PM
The good thing is that a hell of a lot more teams will really be out of the race this time, so they won't have any reason to claim Griffey. Also, every team in the AL Central is out of it. I don't think they'll have any reason to do any blocking either.

There are fewer that are still in races, so we still have a chance.

This may be a reason for the Reds to hold off waiving him for another week or 2. To let more teams get out of the race and minimize the chance of someone claiming him.

Randar68
08-03-2005, 01:22 PM
I think Kenny will get it done. But I'm not optimistic of Lindner having a sudden change of heart.

I'd guess they don't want to be responsible for any more of his $$$, and that was the reason they blocked it. Just a guess, though. It certainly can't be the prospects. Rogo and Young are both top-10 type prospects within the org with Young vaulting into the top 2-3, IMO...

Randar68
08-03-2005, 01:23 PM
Anything that includes resigning Konerko doesn't interest me.

Ditto that! I'd rather see Dye get a 4-year extension and move him to 1st base.

nodiggity59
08-03-2005, 01:25 PM
Ditto that! I'd rather see Dye get a 4-year extension and move him to 1st base.

Do you think that's a good move defensively?

Mickster
08-03-2005, 01:26 PM
Do you think that's a good move defensively?

This year? No way. If you give Dye time at 1B, I think that he is athletic enough to be a decent, if not good defensive first baseman.

Randar68
08-03-2005, 01:29 PM
Do you think that's a good move defensively?

Don't know, frankly, But Anderson is a better CF'er than Rowand and with all the Sox prospects in the OF, I feel they are better served by making room for them by moving Dye to 1st base.

I don't know if he can handle it full-time (been discussed in several threads here) and he'd have to learn the position in winter ball, but he is 6'5" and athletic, something Konerko isn't...

Would his arm be wasted there? Sure. But Rowand and Anderson both have strong arms to take his place. It's not like we'd be moving Pods to RF...

Also, if the Griffey stuff does come to fruition, that's a pretty darn crowded OF scenario, isn't it?

Griffey, Dye, and Carl rotate DH/OF?

Also, which would you rather? Resign Pauly, or trade for Griffey and let Konerko walk?

Tragg
08-03-2005, 01:31 PM
Nobody would claim him off of waivers.

What I don't understand is that the reds were going to pay the current salary and we'd start paying the salary after this year? That's the part I don't get. It means that JR is assuredly NOT spending the dividend he earned this season - he'll just defer it to future years and count it against those seasons' budgets.

Pay it NOW when we have the attendance, et al to support a high salary. Cut the Reds a big fat check and get it out of the way.

Otherwise, we'll be dumping salary in the offseason - AGAIN; and JR if must wait until the team is good before adding salary (i.e. at midseason, when the trades invariably involve young players and not vets for vets) then KW has minimal flexibility to move the team forward. He can't pull rabbits out of the hat like he did last offseason with a limited payroll every year.

nodiggity59
08-03-2005, 01:31 PM
Don't know, frankly, But Anderson is a better CF'er than Rowand and with all the Sox prospects in the OF, I feel they are better served by making room for them by moving Dye to 1st base.

I don't know if he can handle it full-time (been discussed in several threads here) and he'd have to learn the position in winter ball, but he is 6'5" and athletic, something Konerko isn't...

Would his arm be wasted there? Sure. But Rowand and Anderson both have strong arms to take his place. It's not like we'd be moving Pods to RF...

Also, if the Griffey stuff does come to fruition, that's a pretty darn crowded OF scenario, isn't it?

Griffey, Dye, and Carl rotate DH/OF?

Also, which would you rather? Resign Pauly, or trade for Griffey and let Konerko walk?

True. Any way you slice it, Paulie has to go if he wants anything more than $4-5mil per year. He's just not worth it for this team at $9mil.

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 01:32 PM
Regardless, I can't see the Yankees passing on Griffey.

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 01:33 PM
Nobody would claim him off of waivers.

What I don't understand is that the reds were going to pay the current salary and we'd start paying the salary after this year? That's the part I don't like. With this season he still wants to defer everything he has to pay??? Pay it NOW when we have the attendance, et al to support a high salary. Cut the Reds a big fat check and get it out of the way.

Otherwise, we'll be dumping salary in the offseason - AGAIN; and JR if must wait until the team is good before adding salary (i.e. at midseason, when the trades invariably involve young players and not vets for vets) then KW has minimal flexibility to move the team forward. He can't pull rabbits out of the hat like he did last offseason with a limited payroll every year.

When did we cut salary?

Jjav829
08-03-2005, 01:34 PM
I'd guess they don't want to be responsible for any more of his $$$, and that was the reason they blocked it. Just a guess, though. It certainly can't be the prospects. Rogo and Young are both top-10 type prospects within the org with Young vaulting into the top 2-3, IMO...

I'm worried that Lindner killed it because he's worried about the fan backlash. Griffey has had a lot of injury problems, but he's still Ken Griffey Jr. I don't know for sure, but I'd guess that Griffey is still a fan favorite in Cincinnati. The diehards would probably understand that it's better for the team to clear that money. But I'd guess the common fan would rather see Griffey on the team than not on the team and they probably don't care about his salary. So I'm guessing that Lindner probably cares more about not alienating those fans than doing what is best for the team.

bennyw41
08-03-2005, 01:37 PM
I'm confused. Don't the prospects have to clear waivers as well? Can't a block be formed there? If you claim someone to block, doesn't that mean you must take on their salary completely, and the waiving team gets no compensation?

Tragg
08-03-2005, 01:40 PM
When did we cut salary?

"Cut" isn't exactly accurate - "carefully manage" is better. In the Everett/Alomar trades, he routinely gave away more prospects rather than pick up more salary.
Although Pods is obviously the key to this O, the Lee trade was one-sided talent-wise because we needed to cut that salary to afford to add a pitcher and Iguchi (and eventually AJ). That was really a brilliant stroke by Williams as well, as, perhaps some luck; for example re luck, if Clement had signed with us, would we have AJ at catcher? I doubt it. So we signed El D at a cheaper price, had some money left, and signed AJ.

Things worked out perfectly - all the pieces fell THIS offseason. I'd like to see KW have a bit more flexibility, which he assurdely won't have if JR hangs the Griffey contract over his head for each of the next 10 years.

Also, if We're paying a lot of Griffey's salary, 3 top prospects is an awfully high price. We should be able to cut a better deal than that for Griffey.

Jjav829
08-03-2005, 01:41 PM
I'm confused. Don't the prospects have to clear waivers as well? Can't a block be formed there? If you claim someone to block, doesn't that mean you must take on their salary completely, and the waiving team gets no compensation?

I believe prospects do not have to pass through waivers. When a team claims a player, the team who put the player on waivers has three options. 1.) They can pull the player back, since these are revocable waivers. 2.) They can simply allow the claiming team to have the player, meaning the claiming team is thus responsible for all of that players salary. 3.) They can work out a trade for the player with the claiming team.

Rocklive99
08-03-2005, 01:42 PM
I say, if the money is the same or similar, then just claim him off waivers (even though it'd be the same situation, since we'd be the absolute last team to have a chance). I say this because of his no-trade clause, and that some dope on Sporting News last week said he didn't want to come to the White Sox, he wants a place who has ST in Florida, and he'd probably wouldn't accept it. I know it's just some radio idiot, but it kind of worries me since I think Cinci is his home town

Randar68
08-03-2005, 01:43 PM
I believe prospects do not have to pass through waivers. When a team claims a player, the team who put the player on waivers has three options. 1.) They can pull the player back, since these are revocable waivers. 2.) They can simply allow the claiming team to have the player, meaning the claiming team is thus responsible for all of that players salary. 3.) They can work out a trade for the player with the claiming team.

IIRC players not on the 25-man roster (may even be 40-man, don't recall), don't have to clear waivers...

Randar68
08-03-2005, 01:44 PM
but I'd guess that Griffey is still a fan favorite in Cincinnati.

Griffey never lived up to what the fans there expected... he's been boo'd and generally speaking, all parties have been somewhat unhappy with how things have transpired.

Jjav829
08-03-2005, 01:46 PM
Ugh, and this confirms my fears. I found this on the Reds message board redszone.com. The poster says this is from the newest issue of Baseball Weekly, which I guess is only available in print form and not online.

The greatest trade that was actually made - and vetoed - was a true blockbuster: The Reds were trading center fielder Ken Griffey Jr. to the White Sox for top minor league outfielder Chris Young, first baseman Casey Rogowski, along with a fringe prospect. The trade, which included the Reds picking up $4.5 million of Griffey's $13 million annual salary the next three years, was agreed upon the night of July 29. Griffey even let friends know that he would waive his 10-and-5 rights and accept the trade."

"But Reds owner Carl Lindner killed it Saturday morning."

"Lindner simply did not want to deal with the public relations fallout, while also remembering how difficult it was acquiring Griffey from Seattle in the first place."

Damn you, Lindner. Damn you. :angry:

Link (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=801918&postcount=64)

Tragg
08-03-2005, 01:46 PM
I say, if the money is the same or similar, then just claim him off waivers (even though it'd be the same situation, since we'd be the absolute last team to have a chance).

I agree - if all we were doing was getting the reds to pick up $4.5 million, spend the cash, amortize it over 10 years, and save the prospects.

Mickster
08-03-2005, 01:47 PM
Regardless, I can't see the Yankees passing on Griffey.

In what order do the teams "line up" in order to claim/reject a player who is placed on waivers. Is it current standings or '04 standings?

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 01:47 PM
Ugh, and this confirms my fears. I found this on the Reds message board redszone.com. The poster says this is from the newest issue on Baseball Weekly, which I guess is only available in print form and not online.



Damn you, Lindner. Damn you. :angry:

Link (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=801918&postcount=64)

Good. Trading Young for a marginal upgrade is a bad move.

UofCSoxFan
08-03-2005, 01:47 PM
Every other team in MLB would have to pass on Griffey before he'd fall to the Sox. I can't believe that would happen.

If only Griffey were still in the AL...that'd eliminate the NL right there.

I really don't see this being blocked, however, even by the Yankees. The only way I feel a team could justify blocking the deal would be to say...if we get griffey or if we prevent the Sox from getting Griffey, we will be the favorites to win the World Series. With Griffey, the Yankees still have 0 pitching...offense is not the problem for them. Without Girffey, the Sox still have Everett and are still the favorites to win it all imo.

By blocking this, teams could really handicap themselves in the future and I really don't see anyone doing this.

Mickster
08-03-2005, 01:49 PM
Ugh, and this confirms my fears. I found this on the Reds message board redszone.com. The poster says this is from the newest issue on Baseball Weekly, which I guess is only available in print form and not online.



Damn you, Lindner. Damn you. :angry:

Link (http://www.redszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=801918&postcount=64)

This, if true, kills any and all realistic hopes unless there is a drastic change of heart by Cincy's owners.

Randar68
08-03-2005, 01:53 PM
Good. Trading Young for a marginal upgrade is a bad move.

"Marginal Upgrade?"

Ron Shueler, is that you? Let me see... Guy hitting near .300 with 25 HR's and great CF defense and a left-handed stick added to the current lineup???

We're trying to win a World Series, not the Futures Game...

Tragg
08-03-2005, 01:53 PM
I don't think anyone would block him, including the Yanks
I don't think anyone will claim him, including us.
I don't think that the Reds will waive him, especially as they vetoed a trade earlier that gave them more than what they would get from us now (or should get from us now).

I think the Reds misread the Cincy community if he thinks they'd revolt for trading Griffey; I think they'd go crazy if they dumped Dunn and their other young hitters for prospects (a Pirates style move). But Cincy is a smart baseball town, they know G has been, overall, a bust for Cincy, and they would know it's a smart move.

We could really use an impact hitter on this team, so I hope we get him, although the price will be infernally high on our future. Even if the ultra promising Young is a bust, JR is going to hang that salary over Kenny like the sword of Domacles. But it's still worth it.

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 01:57 PM
Nobody would claim him off of waivers.

What I don't understand is that the reds were going to pay the current salary and we'd start paying the salary after this year? That's the part I don't get. It means that JR is assuredly NOT spending the dividend he earned this season - he'll just defer it to future years and count it against those seasons' budgets.

Pay it NOW when we have the attendance, et al to support a high salary. Cut the Reds a big fat check and get it out of the way.

Otherwise, we'll be dumping salary in the offseason - AGAIN; and JR if must wait until the team is good before adding salary (i.e. at midseason, when the trades invariably involve young players and not vets for vets) then KW has minimal flexibility to move the team forward. He can't pull rabbits out of the hat like he did last offseason with a limited payroll every year.

I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think the deal as publicized mentioned whether or not they pay part of the current or deferred salary. Just that they pay $4.5 of his total $12mil. I'm not sure what ability the CBA provides to have another team pay only deferred salary (as opposed to deferred signing bonuses ala the Contreras deal).

Also, you don't know what other plans they had. Perhaps KW/JR thought it better to have the Reds pay for salary in the next 3 years and have the ability to go get an FA pitcher on a Garcia-esque 3-yr deal. That would entail raising salary, during the next few years while we have Freddy, Buehrle, and probably Garland under contract, then possibly cutting it after that time if necessary.

Bottom line: their demands on a long-term deal don't necessarily mean they aren't "spending the dividend". They may just be trying to be smart about going for it now but also keeping their window open as long as possible.

Tragg
08-03-2005, 02:01 PM
I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think the deal as publicized mentioned whether or not they pay part of the current or deferred salary. Just that they pay $4.5 of his total $12mil. .
Good points.

But, $12 million - is that just the salary for playing ball. ARen't there like 15 mil in deferrals he's due? Were we picking up that as well?

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 02:01 PM
This, if true, kills any and all realistic hopes unless there is a drastic change of heart by Cincy's owners.

Hopefully this is publicized in Cinci and Lindner is skewered as a moron, which would lead him to realize that making a deal that's GOOD for the team will always end up as a good PR move. Especially if they go to the FA market and get some pitching.

I'm mostly surprised that they'd trade Griffey for 1B/OF prospects given that they already have Dunn/Kearns/Pena/Casey for a while. Unless they'd think this would give them freedom to trade one of those guys for pitching.

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 02:03 PM
Good points.

But, $12 million - is that just the salary for playing ball. ARen't there like 15 mil in deferrals he's due? Were we picking up that as well?

The $12 mil is $6mil upfront and $6mil deferred. My point is that IIRC, all the Reds can do in terms of paying salary is to send over the $$$, they can't say when it's paid out to Griffey.

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 02:03 PM
"Marginal Upgrade?"

Ron Shueler, is that you? Let me see... Guy hitting near .300 with 25 HR's and great CF defense and a left-handed stick added to the current lineup???

We're trying to win a World Series, not the Futures Game...

I like Griffey as much as the next guy, but he's no longer a great CF. He's a huge risk. I'd rather be a constant winner and build a good organization than doing everything it takes to win this year. Griffey makes us a better team, but doesn't make us unbeatable.

I guess I would probably make the deal if that means that Rowand becomes the 4th OF and Timo is gone. I'm just not a big fan of moving talented prospects.

I'd just like to see the Sox model themselves after Atlanta and kill the loser's mentality.

Tragg
08-03-2005, 02:04 PM
I'm mostly surprised that they'd trade Griffey for 1B/OF prospects given that they already have Dunn/Kearns/Pena/Casey for a while. Unless they'd think this would give them freedom to trade one of those guys for pitching.

That's what would make it a real smart move for the Reds. Take the prospects from us, trade one of the proven young hitters for more pitching in return. And you bring another young player into the pipeline.

JB98
08-03-2005, 02:06 PM
Good. Trading Young for a marginal upgrade is a bad move.

I made this exact argument about Aubrey Huff, but I don't think the "marginal upgrade" thing flies when we're talking about Griffey. I believe he would immediately become the most dangerous hitter in our lineup if we acquired him. I'd be fearful of him getting injured, but I'd be willing to take the risk to try to get to the World Series this year. We could DH him and minimize the injury risks.

On the Konerko argument, I'm reserving judgement until after the playoffs. For me, what he does in the postseason is going to be a big factor. As of now, I'd say he's probably gone. If he hits .400 in the playoffs and we win it all, things might change.

Tragg
08-03-2005, 02:06 PM
The $12 mil is $6mil upfront and $6mil deferred. My point is that IIRC, all the Reds can do in terms of paying salary is to send over the $$$, they can't say when it's paid out to Griffey.

That's it? That's the extent of his contract? Are you sure? What's this $5 million until 2017 years stuff I've read or thought I read?

Randar68
08-03-2005, 02:07 PM
I like Griffey as much as the next guy, but he's no longer a great CF. He's a huge risk. I'd rather be a constant winner and build a good organization than doing everything it takes to win this year. Griffey makes us a better team, but doesn't make us unbeatable.

I guess I would probably make the deal if that means that Rowand becomes the 4th OF and Timo is gone. I'm just not a big fan of moving talented prospects.

I'd just like to see the Sox model themselves after Atlanta and kill the loser's mentality.

Loser's mentality? What are you referring to? Griffey is not the OF'er he was back in his hey-day, that is true. However, we have a small OF as it is, and we have a GLARING hole in the middle of the order here.

I still have a hard time believing we're a legit W.S. contender with the lack of a legit LH'd bat in the middle of the order. We have a collection of .250-.280 hitters in the middle of the lineup and none of them scare anyone...

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 02:08 PM
I like Griffey as much as the next guy, but he's no longer a great CF. He's a huge risk. I'd rather be a constant winner and build a good organization than doing everything it takes to win this year. Griffey makes us a better team, but doesn't make us unbeatable.

I guess I would probably make the deal if that means that Rowand becomes the 4th OF and Timo is gone. I'm just not a big fan of moving talented prospects.

I'd just like to see the Sox model themselves after Atlanta and kill the loser's mentality.

Ummm....Atlanta often makes trades of their prospects for bonafide big league players. The reason they haven't done that as much lately is because they haven't been willing to take on salary.

Pods/Rowand are going to be here for at least 2 more years. Dye for at least 1, with the Sox having an option on '07. You have Anderson coming up soon. Where exactly is Young going to play before '07 or even '08? That doesn't even factor Seeeney into the equation (or Owens).

I'm all for holding onto guys, but you have to be smart about it. Dealing a guy who's unlikely to conribute for at least 2-3 years for a guy that significantly improves your chances to win a title is a great move, not a "loser move".

Tragg
08-03-2005, 02:09 PM
I made this exact argument about Aubrey Huff, but I don't think the "marginal upgrade" thing flies when we're talking about Griffey.
Agree.
Huff is not an impact hitter. A tad better than Konerko and from the left side, which we needed. He would probably be a nice addition to this team, which we could achieve in a normal offseason trade, although I'd probably prefer Overbay.

Griffey is an impact bat. We only need him healthy through October. The ONLY reason for this move is for the playoffs. Not next year, but these playoffs.

Randar68
08-03-2005, 02:09 PM
That's it? That's the extent of his contract? Are you sure? What's this $5 million until 2017 years stuff I've read or thought I read?

It's only been detailed about 12 times in this thread...

12 million / year with 6 of that deferred from 2009-20016 or whatever...

Basically, the contract pays him 6 million per year out over the remainder of the deal plus 6 million per year for every year of the contract beyond that...

i.e. 8 year deal for 12/year ------> 16 year deal for 6/year.

The Sox would not be picking up the deferrals related to the seasons he's already played in Cinci.

podserifik!
08-03-2005, 02:10 PM
Is there any devolopement of this happening? I don't think we need anymore hittin who are we going to take out of the line up? and where would we put him?

maurice
08-03-2005, 02:11 PM
IMHO, the deal probably isn't intended to replace Rowand. Rather, Griffey would be able to fill in at a number of positions. I suspect Everett would lose far more ABs in the deal than Rowand.

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 02:11 PM
That's it? That's the extent of his contract? Are you sure? What's this $5 million until 2017 years stuff I've read or thought I read?

The deferrals started a while ago, and start paying out in 2009. So in that year, he's going to get the money deferred from yr1 of his deal (whenever that was). I believe this would remain the responsibility of the Reds since it's officially salary he earned under them.

The Sox would be responsible for $6mil/yr from 2006-2008, and then $6mil/yr deferred for each of those years. I'm not sure about the 2017 date, but perhaps the 2008 deferral is due in 2017. So under that hypothesis, the Sox would pay him $6mil/yr from 2006-2008 and then $6mil/yr from 2015-2017.

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 02:11 PM
Loser's mentality? What are you referring to? Griffey is not the OF'er he was back in his hey-day, that is true. However, we have a small OF as it is, and we have a GLARING hole in the middle of the order here.

I still have a hard time believing we're a legit W.S. contender with the lack of a legit LH'd bat in the middle of the order. We have a collection of .250-.280 hitters in the middle of the lineup and none of them scare anyone...

The loser's mentality is a reference to the people that say, "I'd trade the whole farm and suck for the next 50 years to win this year." That's b.s. IMO. I don't care when the last time we won a world series was. I don't care that we've been consistant losers. The future starts now.

The more I think about, the more I like the deal. I don't think it's very realistic but, Griffey would be a great addition.

Tragg
08-03-2005, 02:12 PM
Pods/Rowand are going to be here for at least 2 more years. .

ONe of the nice things about this trade is that we wouldn't be mortgaging th future with it - like giving up our best pitching prospect in ages.


I will take the opportunity to point out (again) that Rowand would make outstanding trade-bait THIS offseason, especially if Anderson hits in September.
A good player at a low salary to a team that needs a good CF, could bring us a good player that we need in return.

Jjav829
08-03-2005, 02:12 PM
I like Griffey as much as the next guy, but he's no longer a great CF. He's a huge risk. I'd rather be a constant winner and build a good organization than doing everything it takes to win this year. Griffey makes us a better team, but doesn't make us unbeatable.

I guess I would probably make the deal if that means that Rowand becomes the 4th OF and Timo is gone. I'm just not a big fan of moving talented prospects.

I'd just like to see the Sox model themselves after Atlanta and kill the loser's mentality.

What loser's mentality? This team is consistently mediocre; not great, but not awful. Trying to do what Atlanta has done is quite possibly even harder than attempting to build World Series winner. Screw what Atlanta has done. They've had a nice run but how many championships have they won? 13 division titles and only one World Series championship. One.

This team hasn't won a World Series since 1917. You're content with just trying to be one of the best teams in future years and not the best team this year?

Randar68
08-03-2005, 02:13 PM
IMHO, the deal probably isn't intended to replace Rowand. Rather, Griffey would be able to fill in at a number of positions. I suspect Everett would lose far more ABs in the deal than Rowand.

Yep, it would be rotating Carl/Dye/Griffey and Rowand would get 1-2 days off a week probably.

With Frank being out and Carl the primary DH, I would guess he'd go back to playing about 2 games a week the way he was when Frank had come back...

podserifik!
08-03-2005, 02:13 PM
MAke a poll of this trade.

Because I think we have no room for him and Everett deserves better than this.

Who would we send down?

What if we get burroughs too?

How much is he making?

Is all questions I would like to know the answers to.

maurice
08-03-2005, 02:14 PM
IMHO, there's no question that at least 1 of Anderson-Young-Sweeney will be dealt in the next couple of years. The key is to get back a productive player (starter or big bat) that will help put the team over the top. That's not selling the farm. That's smart management.

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 02:15 PM
ONe of the nice things about this trade is that we wouldn't be mortgaging th future with it - like giving up our best pitching prospect in ages.


I will take the opportunity to point out (again) that Rowand would make outstanding trade-bait THIS offseason, especially if Anderson hits in September.
A good player at a low salary to a team that needs a good CF, could bring us a good player that we need in return.


I think we value Rowand more than other teams. Rowand's a tough player, but in reality he's more of a RH Kotsay who K's a little more and walks less.

Randar68
08-03-2005, 02:16 PM
The loser's mentality is a reference to the people that say, "I'd trade the whole farm and suck for the next 50 years to win this year." That's b.s. IMO. I don't care when the last time we won a world series was. I don't care that we've been consistant losers. The future starts now.

The more I think about, the more I like the deal. I don't think it's very realistic but, Griffey would be a great addition.

Consistent Losers? *** have you been watching the past 15 years? The Sox are the only team that has not had a top 10 pick in the last 15 years...

Read that again. Mediocre? Sure. Just good enough to not make the playoffs? Many times...

Consistent losers? We haven't won a W.S. since 1917 and I would really like to see one in my lifetime... The Iron is hot, it's time to strike.

A loser's mentality is to sit on your hands as you've advocated doing...

Tragg
08-03-2005, 02:16 PM
It's only been detailed about 12 times in this thread...

12 million / year with 6 of that deferred from 2009-20016 or whatever...

Basically, the contract pays him 6 million per year out over the remainder of the deal plus 6 million per year for every year of the contract beyond that...

i.e. 8 year deal for 12/year ------> 16 year deal for 6/year.

The Sox would not be picking up the deferrals related to the seasons he's already played in Cinci.

Thank you for indulging me with another explanation.
And if I may ask IF we claimed him off waivers, would we be responsible for his deferrals for the years played in Cincy? Or just the deferrals related to the years remaining on the base contract?

maurice
08-03-2005, 02:18 PM
Who would we send down?
What if we get burroughs too?
How much is he making?
Is all questions I would like to know the answers to.

Read this thread and the Burroughs thread, wherein all these questions already have been answered.

Randar68
08-03-2005, 02:18 PM
MAke a poll of this trade.

Because I think we have no room for him and Everett deserves better than this.

Who would we send down?

What if we get burroughs too?

How much is he making?

Is all questions I would like to know the answers to.

If we get Burroughs he'd be at AAA and insurance should Crede's back totally give out. He'd not be on the 25-man roster.

So, we shouldn't get Griffey because .250-hitting Carl Everett deserves better? This isn't a popularity contest, bro. This is trying to win the damned World Series that has eluded us for 89 years...

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 02:19 PM
Thank you for indulging me with another explanation.
And if I may ask IF we claimed him off waivers, would we be responsible for his deferrals for the years played in Cincy? Or just the deferrals related to the years remaining on the base contract?

I'm not 100% on this, but I'd think we'd be responsible for his salary from here on out. Meaning that any salary he's earned while a member of the Reds would still be their responsibility, regardless of what payment arrangements/deferals they'd made with him.

So we'd owe him the $12mil/yr from 06-08 with 1/2 of that deferred.

kittle42
08-03-2005, 02:19 PM
MAke a poll of this trade.

Because I think we have no room for him and Everett deserves better than this.

Who would we send down?

Is all questions I would like to know the answers to.

"Everett deserves better than this"? Did you say that when Thomas came back, too?

Who cares who we would send down?

Having Griffey in there 6 of every 7 games and having that Carl/Dye/Rowand/Pods rotation cover the other spots is just fine with me.

Randar68
08-03-2005, 02:19 PM
Thank you for indulging me with another explanation.
And if I may ask IF we claimed him off waivers, would we be responsible for his deferrals for the years played in Cincy? Or just the deferrals related to the years remaining on the base contract?
Only what remains on his contract with this year being a pro-rated split between the teams (both this year and deferred portions)...

podserifik!
08-03-2005, 02:21 PM
We have no place to put him and lets face it Griffey would NOT pass waivers to go to a team where he is going to be a DH.

Either way we have alot of young talent and we should not waist our time on Burroughs he is a piece of crap.

How much does griffey make is what I want to know?

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 02:21 PM
Consistent Losers? *** have you been watching the past 15 years? The Sox are the only team that has not had a top 10 pick in the last 15 years...

Read that again. Mediocre? Sure. Just good enough to not make the playoffs? Many times...

Consistent losers? We haven't won a W.S. since 1917 and I would really like to see one in my lifetime... The Iron is hot, it's time to strike.

A loser's mentality is to sit on your hands as you've advocated doing...

Lol. You just said we're not consistant losers and that we haven't won a world series since 1917 all in one post. :redneck

Jjav829
08-03-2005, 02:21 PM
Loser's mentality? What are you referring to? Griffey is not the OF'er he was back in his hey-day, that is true. However, we have a small OF as it is, and we have a GLARING hole in the middle of the order here.

I still have a hard time believing we're a legit W.S. contender with the lack of a legit LH'd bat in the middle of the order. We have a collection of .250-.280 hitters in the middle of the lineup and none of them scare anyone...

Completely agree. Look at the other contenders around baseball and you're going to find true impact middle-of-the-order hitters. In Boston you have Manny and Big Poppi. In New York you have Sheffield, Arod, and Matsui. In Anaheim you have Vlad. Even Oakland has Eric Chavez. Cleveland has Hafner. Atlanta has Andruw and Chipper. St. Louis has Pujols and Edmonds. Houston has Berkman and Ensberg. Florida has Cabrera and Delgado. Philadelphia has Abreu and Burrell. The Cubs have Lee and Ramirez. The Mets have Beltran and Floyd.

The only exception would be Washington, though there's some case to be made for Jose Guillen. This team right now lacks that true impact player who strikes fear into the opponents and can single-handedly change a game. The closest thing we have to that is Konerko and I don't think any pitcher is going to be getting all sweaty on the mound knowing that Paul Konerko is standing on deck.

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 02:22 PM
How much does griffey make is what I want to know?

Are you even reading this thread? ***? It's only mentioned about every other post!

JB98
08-03-2005, 02:22 PM
MAke a poll of this trade.

Because I think we have no room for him and Everett deserves better than this.

Who would we send down?

What if we get burroughs too?

How much is he making?

Is all questions I would like to know the answers to.

Addressing each of your points one by one:

Everett gave up some ABs to a future HOF'er in Frank Thomas. I think he'd be willing to up some ABs to a future HOF'er like Griffey.

We'd send down Adkins.

Screw Burroughs. Geoff Blum can do the job.

See Randar's posts. He's detailed Griffey's contract situation.

kittle42
08-03-2005, 02:23 PM
We have no place to put him and lets face it Griffey would NOT pass waivers to go to a team where he is going to be a DH.

Either way we have alot of young talent and we should not waist our time on Burroughs he is a piece of crap.

How much does griffey make is what I want to know?

:dtroll: ???? Gopodsgo, etc, for like the umpteenth time?

Tragg
08-03-2005, 02:24 PM
Because I think we have no room for him and Everett deserves better than this.


What does Everett deserve?

Does he deserve more than the WS championship that the Sox and the Sox fans deserve?

podserifik!
08-03-2005, 02:26 PM
Ya are we getting paid to watch them? No

Is he getting paid 4 million dollars to sit on the bench? NO

Do we need another Hitter? NO

Will we get Griffey? No

Tragg
08-03-2005, 02:26 PM
Only what remains on his contract with this year being a pro-rated split between the teams (both this year and deferred portions)...

Okay, so he very well could get claimed.

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 02:26 PM
Out of curiousity, when's the last time a team won the WS because they added a big bat 2/3 of the way?

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 02:27 PM
One more quick question......Why would the Yankees not claim Griffey?

JB98
08-03-2005, 02:27 PM
What does Everett deserve?

Does he deserve more than the Sox or the Sox fans?

Carl would step aside without complaint if we acquired Griffey. He stepped aside without complaint when Frank came off the DL. Everett is no dummy. He knows what is up.

Now, if we asked him to step aside for Aubrey Huff, he might be pissed and rightfully so.

Tragg
08-03-2005, 02:30 PM
Carl would step aside without complaint if we acquired Griffey. He stepped aside without complaint when Frank came off the DL. Everett is no dummy. He knows what is up.

Now, if we asked him to step aside for Aubrey Huff, he might be pissed and rightfully so.

I agree, but he's gonna play a lot regardless of who we get. And I don't think there's much griping and complaining this time of year with our record.

Everyone on our team has played a ton this year. You read BP and they say our bench is useless; maybe it is, but our record has been achieved with a useless bench getting to play twice a week.

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 02:30 PM
Carl would step aside without complaint if we acquired Griffey. He stepped aside without complaint when Frank came off the DL. Everett is no dummy. He knows what is up.

Now, if we asked him to step aside for Aubrey Huff, he might be pissed and rightfully so.

One final question.... Why would Griffey replace Everett and not Rowand? Everett > Rowand this year.

podserifik!
08-03-2005, 02:32 PM
What is the possibility that we will get him?
Not very high I don't think.

If the playofss started today DO you think we would have enough to win it? and that is the main question that we need to answer.

Malgar 12
08-03-2005, 02:33 PM
I'm just not a big fan of moving talented prospects.


talented prospects are the only kind of prospects you can trade. Even Willie Harris was supposedly talented when the Sox traded for him. You can't land Griffey if you're willing to give up some talent. If you can do it without giving up Sweeney, Anderson, or McCarthy, you've done a good job.

Paulwny
08-03-2005, 02:33 PM
One more quick question......Why would the Yankees not claim Griffey?

I'm with you, especially with Williams not being offered a contract extension. King George loves big name players.

The Dude
08-03-2005, 02:34 PM
didnt see this posted, but here's discussion from the Reds board. the seem pissed that this deal didnt go through as well.
http://www.redszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38862&page=1&pp=20

Pretty nice board, very similiar to WSI.

JB98
08-03-2005, 02:35 PM
One final question.... Why would Griffey replace Everett and not Rowand? Everett > Rowand this year.

It's a valid question, but my feeling is we'd want to DH Griffey as much as possible given his history of injury. I'm sure that Rowand would lose some at-bats as well, but probably not as many as Carl.

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 02:35 PM
talented prospects are the only kind of prospects you can trade. Even Willie Harris was supposedly talented when the Sox traded for him. You can't land Griffey if you're willing to give up some talent. If you can do it without giving up Sweeney, Anderson, or McCarthy, you've done a good job.

Depending on if you value Sweeney and Anderson over Young.

brewcrew/chisox
08-03-2005, 02:35 PM
Ya are we getting paid to watch them? No

Is he getting paid 4 million dollars to sit on the bench? NO

Do we need another Hitter? NO

Will we get Griffey? No

Are you the Pods :dtroll: that can't take a hint?




:hawk
"YEEES!

whitesoxfan
08-03-2005, 02:35 PM
Larry Walker was traded from the Rockies which meant every NL passed over him which led to the Cards trading for him. With Griffey he would have to get passed up by every NL team first, and then by every AL team.

i do fear that the Cubs would try to go after Griffey more so then any other team besides us. They were rumored for Dunn and Kearns during the trade deadline and were also rumored for Griffey near the very end of the deadline. And then of course if they pass up on him, you'd think the Yanks might want him as well.

i think the possibility of us getting him is around 25-30% and that definitely could rise as we get closer to the August 31st deadline... i would love to see him in a Sox uniform.

JB98
08-03-2005, 02:38 PM
I'm with you, especially with Williams not being offered a contract extension. King George loves big name players.

But would Griffey go there? Didn't he say he didn't want to play in New York at some point?

Also, does anyone know whether 10 and 5 rights apply to waiver deals?

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 02:40 PM
i do fear that the Cubs would try to go after Griffey more so then any other team besides us. They were rumored for Dunn and Kearns during the trade deadline and were also rumored for Griffey near the very end of the deadline. And then of course if they pass up on him, you'd think the Yanks might want him as well.

i think the possibility of us getting him is around 25-30% and that definitely could rise as we get closer to the August 31st deadline... i would love to see him in a Sox uniform.

Well, the Reds could make it known that they'll only let Griffey go if they get a decent trade for him. So the Cubs & Yankees would have to be willing to take on the salary (less the Reds payment), and give up some prospects the Reds want. Otherwise, they wouldn't get him and the only reason they'd be putting in the claim is to block the Sox. Yanks might do that, but I'm not sure the Cubs would.

If they wait another 2 weeks or so, the Cubs ought to be far enough back that they'd be even less likely to put in a claim. Possibly the Yanks as well, but possibly not.

Or maybe KW says "George - don't claim Griff and I'll deal you a mid-tier guy". Someone like Wing.

thepaulbowski
08-03-2005, 02:40 PM
Same here. I also wonder if Boston would take a chance, with the thought of either letting Damon go this offseason, or trading Ramirez during the offseason, resigning Damon, and playing Damon in left where his arm wouldn't be as big a detriment. They have the money to pay Griffey and Manny for the rest of the season.

I think the possibility could be even greater if Nixon is out for a while.

Manny passed through waivers last year, why wouldn't Griffey?

podserifik!
08-03-2005, 02:45 PM
IS there any news on this trade?
It is finally starting to sink in I am starting to like it.

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 02:47 PM
Manny passed through waivers last year, why wouldn't Griffey?

A. Better contract.
B. Actually has a ton of value for New York.

Rocklive99
08-03-2005, 02:57 PM
I don't get the people who would be against this, Griffey's numbers this year are better than any member of our starting lineup, DHing him will limit the injury risk, and it's a big left handed stick. Add that to Pods and Iguchi hitting 1 and 2 and our pitching staff, and you have a team that is not to be messed with. This will fill the void Big Frank left, and have the same effect to make pitchers think twice about pitching to some hitters while pitching around to others. Do it!

I like Carl, and he's been great, but that'll also be a nice bat that can come off the bench in the playoffs, better than Ross Gload.

nedlug
08-03-2005, 02:57 PM
This thread has grown so fast, it's amazing! Seriously, every time I go to one page which I think is the last one, another page opens up. Apparently, Griffey (desrevedly so) rumors have really given this board some nice midday activity.

I would love Griffey, and I don't think that anyone will claim him. Deferred or not, it is a large financial commitment being risked. However, the Yanks might let him go through and try and get a trade through after he clears. The Sox being last to claim him can actually be a great position to be in - they can claim him (and risk taking his whole contract) to directly deal with the Reds with no other players. That would seem to me like the perfect situation for KW. The Reds owner probably wouldn't let Griffey go for nothing, just for the PR that kind of deal would generate. I'm sure the Reds and their fans would much more like to see a top-tier prospect or two in return for paying some of KGJ's contract.

samram
08-03-2005, 02:58 PM
Manny passed through waivers last year, why wouldn't Griffey?

Basically what TaylorSt said. Griffey isn't getting $20M a year. Let's also remember that in this scenario, both Boston and NYY are players. Last year, neither was a player because Boston put him on waivers and wouldn't have traded him to the Yankees.

ilsox7
08-03-2005, 02:59 PM
Are we still getting AJ, too?

Seriously, Griffey would be HUGE for us. He can DH, play center, and possibly learn to play 1st for the remainder of his contract. Anything to keep him healthy.

pudge
08-03-2005, 03:02 PM
Consistent Losers? *** have you been watching the past 15 years? The Sox are the only team that has not had a top 10 pick in the last 15 years...

Read that again. Mediocre? Sure. Just good enough to not make the playoffs? Many times...

Consistent losers? We haven't won a W.S. since 1917 and I would really like to see one in my lifetime... The Iron is hot, it's time to strike.

A loser's mentality is to sit on your hands as you've advocated doing...

I like this new Randar! Not the same Randar as when I wanted to win it all in 2003!
:smile:
It sounds like the future money on Griffey isn't bad, especially if the Reds pickup $4 mil... too bad that moron owner got in the way.

Man Soo Lee
08-03-2005, 03:05 PM
I think we value Rowand more than other teams. Rowand's a tough player, but in reality he's more of a RH Kotsay who K's a little more and walks less.

Remember how many teams were reportedly interested in Kotsay before he signed the contract extension? I think plenty of teams would be interested in a similar player who makes 1/3 the money.

Out of curiousity, when's the last time a team won the WS because they added a big bat 2/3 of the way?

I don't know the answer, but I'd bet it was more recent than a team winning a World Series without a legitimate #3 hitter.

Randar68
08-03-2005, 03:05 PM
I like this new Randar! Not the same Randar as when I wanted to win it all in 2003!
:smile:
It sounds like the future money on Griffey isn't bad, especially if the Reds pickup $4 mil... too bad that moron owner got in the way.

IMO, the difference is dealing from strength. The Sox have 4 legit OF prospects at the AA level or above and 2 of them are excellent CF'ers...

I would certainly not hesitate to take all of his remaining money because it would basically be replacing Konerko (beyond this year) with Griffey and only dealing with over-lapping salaries for ~2 months...

hawkjt
08-03-2005, 03:31 PM
They are reporting that the sox had a deal for jr. that reds ownership nixed. supposedly 3 prospects for griffey.

He has 4 years left after this year on a contract that pays 12.5 mil a year with most of it defferred. Plus a buyout for 4 mil in 2010.

If Frank is done we do need a DH going forward. Junior is having a good year. Could he stay healthy as a DH? Can he be productive for 4 more years. How old is he? Just thinking out loud that a lefty would be nice altho carl is still here if we want him.

The report said we may go back to the reds in aug. He may get thru waivers with that contract. If we claim on waivers do we have to give them the prospects?

ilsox7
08-03-2005, 03:38 PM
http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=55469

14 zillion posts there.

GAsoxfan
08-03-2005, 03:48 PM
I'd be completely in favor of trading for Griffey. Sticking him in the middle would be a big upgrade over Carl, not just in production increase from that spot, but the affect it would have on those around Griffey. No pitcher is going to worry about Crazy Carl on deck, but they would worry about Griffey, which would cause other hitters to get better pitches to hit.

Also, the only thing Carl "deserves" is $4M for showing up everyday. He doesn't deserve playing time over Griffey, or even Rowand for that matter.

Mr. White Sox
08-03-2005, 03:50 PM
Here's what I'm wondering...

do you think trading for Burroughs is a precursor to a possible Griffey deal? Blum is a fine backup for Crede, and there's no information that suggests Crede's back problems are serious. The usatoday.com article said that the Sox were going to trade three prospects...I could only think that a top, middle and middle/low would be used for this deal, as the contract more than makes up for the talent. Possibly Brian Anderson, Chuck Haeger, and ...Burroughs? The Reds could use another 3B in case Edwin Encarnacion fails (Burroughs starts) or succeeds (Burroughs is a backup). Just my uninformed .02

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 03:54 PM
I'd be completely in favor of trading for Griffey. Sticking him in the middle would be a big upgrade over Carl, not just in production increase from that spot, but the affect it would have on those around Griffey. No pitcher is going to worry about Crazy Carl on deck, but they would worry about Griffey, which would cause other hitters to get better pitches to hit.

Also, the only thing Carl "deserves" is $4M for showing up everyday. He doesn't deserve playing time over Griffey, or even Rowand for that matter.

The Griffey deal makes sense. I don't see how anybody can rationally say that Everett < Rowand. He may be a fan favorite, but he's not producing.

Podzilla_40
08-03-2005, 04:01 PM
I think there's absolutely no chance at all that he clears, this is too much of a blockbuster to turn for a waiver deal.

Ol' No. 2
08-03-2005, 04:05 PM
I have for some time been arguing against the "trade away everything now and go for it" point of view. But Hell's Bells!!! Ken Griffey, Jr.???? Where do I sign? If the Sox had been dealing McCarthy, I might have to think about it, but they're loaded with OF talent, and there are not going to be enough spots to put them all, anyway. I'd do this deal in a nanosecond.

One other point. Regardless of the original terms of the contract, the current CBA requires that all deferrals on previously signed contracts be fully funded "on or before the third January 1 following the championship season in which the deferred compensation is earned."

But I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell that all 28 other teams will pass on him. So it's probably all moot, anyway.

mdep524
08-03-2005, 04:06 PM
Wow. This is jaw-dropping. Could you even imagine the reaction in this city if this trade went down last weekend? It'd be unreal.

I just want to say how angry I am at the supposed also-rans and sellers this year. Cincinnati, Tampa Bay, Philadelphia and San Francisco were all too stubborn, short-sighted and just plain stupid to make very fair deals at the deadline. Did they have reasons? Sure. Some good, some bad. Its just frustrating that this gridlock of stupid GMs(/ownership) and hyper-competitive division/wildcard races had to happen the one summer the White Sox are making a World Series run.

Not that I think this team needs that much more help, but if Ken Williams deemed a big time deal to be beneficial, it is just maddening he couldn't get anything done because of other teams' ineptitude.

(The of course there's the Pirates, once again serving as the Cubs AAA team.)

GAsoxfan
08-03-2005, 04:17 PM
The Griffey deal makes sense. I don't see how anybody can rationally say that Everett < Rowand. He may be a fan favorite, but he's not producing.

Rowand may not have the power numbers Everett has, but Rowand has a higher BA and OBP. Rowand has a higher BA w/RISP (.333) and is better in the field. I don't see how you could say Everett deserves to play over Rowand.

BeviBall!
08-03-2005, 04:17 PM
Griffey clears waivers no problem... no one will take on that salary or have the prospects to get a deal done. Now, the Sox will probably have to eat all of his salary to make this work, since we already know they like our farm system.

TaylorStSox
08-03-2005, 05:07 PM
Rowand may not have the power numbers Everett has, but Rowand has a higher BA and OBP. Rowand has a higher BA w/RISP (.333) and is better in the field. I don't see how you could say Everett deserves to play over Rowand.

Everett's job is to draw walks and drive runs in. He's done both a much higher rate than Rowand.

DickAllen72
08-03-2005, 05:15 PM
Here's some wishful thinking:

Maybe the Reds ownership was satisfied with the deal but put the thumbs down at the last minute so that they could put Griffey on waivers to see if anyone else would claim him. If someone else does, they let him go and that team now has to pick up 100% of the contract. The Reds are off the hook for the entire amount.

If no one else claims him, they complete the deal the Sox agreed to back on July 29th.

maurice
08-03-2005, 05:19 PM
Rowand has a higher BA and OBP. Rowand has a higher BA w/RISP (.333) and is better in the field.

Plus, Rowand is much, much faster. He's also a 2nd-half player, while Everett is more hot-and-cold.

2nd-half stats 2005:
Rowand - .342 / .380 / .466
Everett - .186 / .261 / .305

2nd-half stats 2004:
Rowand - .310 / .361 / .544
Everett - .256 / .311 / .402

Looking at walks in isolation is meaningless, and their AVE w/ RiSP is similar. Rowand's RBI total certainly would be much higher if he hit in the 3 hole behind Podsednik and Iguchi.

I like Carl a lot, but Rowand > Everett. It's not even close.

mjmcend
08-03-2005, 05:23 PM
If anyone is interested here is rotoworld's take on the failed trade. This is one of the few opinions that the trade would be a negative for the Sox.

"Reds owner Carl Lindner killed a deal that would have sent Ken Griffey Jr. to the White Sox for three prospects, the USA Today's Paul White reports.
Not such a bad thing for Chicago, if true. Considering that the White Sox have Brian Anderson and Chris Young on the way and Aaron Rowand is a much, much better defensive center fielder than Griffey, the club would have been better off with Aubrey Huff or another quality corner bat. Aug. 3 - 6:03 pm et"

Although it seems like they didn't see that Young would have been part of the deal. But I agree that Huff (at a reasonable price, what Tampa was reportedly asking was not reasonable) would have been a much better fit for this team, especially for the future.

Optipessimism
08-03-2005, 05:28 PM
Every other team in MLB would have to pass on Griffey before he'd fall to the Sox. I can't believe that would happen.

I'd like it to happen but I agree with you.

If KW got the Reds thinking that they can get a top prospect, an higher mid level prospect, and a third prospect, I doubt they are going to take table scraps for him. They could pull him off waivers to revisit a trade with the Sox in the offseason and then the whole thing would be off for now.

All another team would have to do is claim Griffey. The only negative would be that if Cincy decides they don't want any help and decides that they will give him to say the Red Sox for nothing as long as they pick up the remainder of the contract, which I could see the BoSox doing if they had any plans of say revisiting a trade with the Mets for Ramirez, and also knowing Damon is going to be a FA and will be faught over by lots of teams. That said, there are two teams that could possibly do this, the Yanks and the Red Sox. Maybe there would be an outside shot the Cards claim him, but that's it, and I don't even think they would do that.

I'm crossing my fingers and trying to be as pessimistic as possible about this because that way I can be overjoyed if it happens and not extremely disappointed if it doesn't.

Optipessimism
08-03-2005, 05:36 PM
Loser's mentality? What are you referring to? Griffey is not the OF'er he was back in his hey-day, that is true. However, we have a small OF as it is, and we have a GLARING hole in the middle of the order here.

I still have a hard time believing we're a legit W.S. contender with the lack of a legit LH'd bat in the middle of the order. We have a collection of .250-.280 hitters in the middle of the lineup and none of them scare anyone...

Why are you so easy to agree with?

I've been saying this all year. We need a LH force in the middle of our lineup. I wouldn't care if we take a risk on Griffey or I wouldn't have cared about overpaying for Huff (assuming Tampa only wanted prospects, which I guess now was not the case).

The absence of Thomas really weakens us. We don't have that dominant 3-4 combination that I think a team that has hopes as high as we do needs. I'm not convinced, nor have I ever been, that Konerko is a cleanup hitter. He doesn't hit well enough with RISP. But, if that is what we have to do, then I'm fine with it for now as long as we at least address the need for a big LH bat in the three hole.

TheOldRoman
08-03-2005, 05:40 PM
But I don't think there's a snowball's chance in hell that all 28 other teams will pass on him. So it's probably all moot, anyway.

I think there is a very good chance he doesn't get claimed. If anyone wanted Griffey, they would let him clear waivers and then negotiate with the Reds to get them to eat some of the salary.
If any team claims Griffey, the Reds would say "OK, take him." They would give him away for nothing, and leave the other team to pay the entire contract. Nobody would take on his whole contract when they would be able to get the Reds to pick up some of it by negotiating with them afterwards. The White Sox wouldn't even claim Griffey, they would let him clear so they could negotiate a trade for him.

No team needs Griffey as much as we do. Other teams could use him, but not at his current salary. Nobody would claim him just to keep him from us, that would be 10 times worse than the Randy Myers- Padre deal.
The Yankees wouldn't give out money to Beltran in the offseason, there is no way in hell they would take on a long contract and pay and aging Griffey what they would have paid Beltran. The Yankees need a CF, but they DON'T need offense. We really need Griffey for his left handed power, and there aren't really any alternatives that would clear waivers. All the Yankees need is a CF who can catch a baseball, the rest of their offense is doing fine.

I believe the Reds will put Griffey on waivers just to see what happens. When he clears, KW will try to renegotiate with the Reds, at which point the GM will go to the owner and try to get him to bite this time. Maybe it was just their way or hiking up the price.

mdep524
08-03-2005, 05:43 PM
Another random thought....

If its a left-handed number 3 hitter on a bad team who will pass through waivers we're looking for.....and money is no issue (or at least less of an issue)....what about our ol' buddy..... Todd Helton?

Same situation as Griffey (good player, handcuffing a bad, cheap team that badly needs to go young and rebuild). Better player, but more expensive.

Optipessimism
08-03-2005, 05:45 PM
I think we value Rowand more than other teams. Rowand's a tough player, but in reality he's more of a RH Kotsay who K's a little more and walks less.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I don't think all that highly of Aaron at all as far as being a long term solution. I like him as a player, I like his mentality and his work ethic, but I don't know if he will ever become selective enough at the plate to make the most of his ability.

He's an Eric Byrnes type player in my view. Some years he'll give you more offense than others, but he always plays the game hard and gives his all to pick up a pitcher. He would be of tremendous value if we didn't have Dye or Pods, but we do. We need Dye for his arm and his bat, and we need Pods to lead off. I think Anderson makes him expendable and considering Rowand doens't make too much I think he will be good trade bait in the offseason. It's just my opinion, but I don't think Aaron is wearing black and white next year.

OEO Magglio
08-03-2005, 05:51 PM
Told ya:tongue::whiner:

Optipessimism
08-03-2005, 05:51 PM
I think there is a very good chance he doesn't get claimed. If anyone wanted Griffey, they would let him clear waivers and then negotiate with the Reds to get them to eat some of the salary.
If any team claims Griffey, the Reds would say "OK, take him." They would give him away for nothing, and leave the other team to pay the entire contract. Nobody would take on his whole contract when they would be able to get the Reds to pick up some of it by negotiating with them afterwards. The White Sox wouldn't even claim Griffey, they would let him clear so they could negotiate a trade for him.

No team needs Griffey as much as we do. Other teams could use him, but not at his current salary. Nobody would claim him just to keep him from us, that would be 10 times worse than the Randy Myers- Padre deal.
The Yankees wouldn't give out money to Beltran in the offseason, there is no way in hell they would take on a long contract and pay and aging Griffey what they would have paid Beltran. The Yankees need a CF, but they DON'T need offense. We really need Griffey for his left handed power, and there aren't really any alternatives that would clear waivers. All the Yankees need is a CF who can catch a baseball, the rest of their offense is doing fine.

I believe the Reds will put Griffey on waivers just to see what happens. When he clears, KW will try to renegotiate with the Reds, at which point the GM will go to the owner and try to get him to bite this time. Maybe it was just their way or hiking up the price.

Just a question...

If say the Yanks were to put in a claim for Griffey, would it be possible for the Sox to find themselves in a threeway deal? For example:

Sox trade Rowand, Young, and Rogo to the Yanks
Yanks trade Young, Rogo, and a prospect of their own to Cincy for Griffey
Yanks trade Griffey + cash to the Sox

Would this type of deal be possible since we'd be trading with the Yanks instead of Cincy? And would Rowand still have to go through waivers first?

TheOldRoman
08-03-2005, 05:52 PM
Another random thought....

If its a left-handed number 3 hitter on a bad team who will pass through waivers we're looking for.....and money is no issue (or at least less of an issue)....what about our ol' buddy..... Todd Helton?

Same situation as Griffey (good player, handcuffing a bad, cheap team that badly needs to go young and rebuild). Better player, but more expensive.
I would love to have Helton, too, but he is making much more money than Jr.
2006- $16.6mil
2007- $16.6mil
2008- $16.6mil
2009- $16.6mil
2010- $16.6mil
2011- $19.1mil
Either we get Griffey or we have to rely on Everett the whole season. Carl is much more valuable to this team as a reserve than as a starter.

Optipessimism
08-03-2005, 05:58 PM
I'd be completely in favor of trading for Griffey. Sticking him in the middle would be a big upgrade over Carl, not just in production increase from that spot, but the affect it would have on those around Griffey. No pitcher is going to worry about Crazy Carl on deck, but they would worry about Griffey, which would cause other hitters to get better pitches to hit.

Also, the only thing Carl "deserves" is $4M for showing up everyday. He doesn't deserve playing time over Griffey, or even Rowand for that matter.

I think Carl is a perfect fit for this team as a 4th OF/DH type. He can give a guy the day off without taking away a ton of production, and is a huge bat to have come in off the bench. I'd much rather see him go back to the role he was in when Frank was here because it makes the whole team that much more dangerous. Griffey is another great fit because it allows him and Carl to take turns DHing, and when Carl is DHing Griffey can put Rowand on the bench.

TheOldRoman
08-03-2005, 05:58 PM
Just a question...

If say the Yanks were to put in a claim for Griffey, would it be possible for the Sox to find themselves in a threeway deal? For example:

Sox trade Rowand, Young, and Rogo to the Yanks
Yanks trade Young, Rogo, and a prospect of their own to Cincy for Griffey
Yanks trade Griffey + cash to the Sox

Would this type of deal be possible since we'd be trading with the Yanks instead of Cincy? And would Rowand still have to go through waivers first?
I don't believe so, but you would have to ask Randar or someone else.
Here is the thing - the Yankees wont claim Griffey because the Reds would dump him on them. If the Yankees put in a claim, the Reds wouldn't have to negotiate a trade, they would be rid of Griffey. Also, if the Yankees put in that bid, he is theirs, there is no pulling back the claim. The deal you described might take place after Griffey cleared waivers, but not until then. Also, Rowand would have to clear.

The Racehorse
08-03-2005, 06:03 PM
Not landing Junior because of an 11th hour veto by the Reds owner hurts... gotta give it up to KW though, he's certainly giving it everything he's got to put this team in a position to win...

... damn. :mad:

Optipessimism
08-03-2005, 06:06 PM
I don't believe so, but you would have to ask Randar or someone else.
Here is the thing - the Yankees wont claim Griffey because the Reds would dump him on them. If the Yankees put in a claim, the Reds wouldn't have to negotiate a trade, they would be rid of Griffey. Also, if the Yankees put in that bid, he is theirs, there is no pulling back the claim. The deal you described might take place after Griffey cleared waivers, but not until then. Also, Rowand would have to clear.

Errr.

Why did Cincy have to make this so confusing? What's wrong with the first deal we offered anyway? We're giving them a guy who has been called the best all around player in our system and another guy who looks like he has the potential to put up Sean Casey type numbers for an expensive, old, injury prone CF they can't use.

*** Cincy?

I was down on KW and the Sox after getting Blum and calling it a day, but if this is true and Cincy turned that deal down I must apologize to you KW.

Optipessimism
08-03-2005, 06:09 PM
Another random thought....

If its a left-handed number 3 hitter on a bad team who will pass through waivers we're looking for.....and money is no issue (or at least less of an issue)....what about our ol' buddy..... Todd Helton?

Same situation as Griffey (good player, handcuffing a bad, cheap team that badly needs to go young and rebuild). Better player, but more expensive.

I don't see Helton because he is just owed too much money for way too long. Can you imagine how screwed we'd be if Uncle Jerry signed Thomas to a deal like that?

mjmcend
08-03-2005, 06:17 PM
I don't believe so, but you would have to ask Randar or someone else.
Here is the thing - the Yankees wont claim Griffey because the Reds would dump him on them. If the Yankees put in a claim, the Reds wouldn't have to negotiate a trade, they would be rid of Griffey. Also, if the Yankees put in that bid, he is theirs, there is no pulling back the claim. The deal you described might take place after Griffey cleared waivers, but not until then. Also, Rowand would have to clear.

I don't see the Reds letting Griffey go on a waiver claim for nothing. The reports mentioned in this thread said the owner blocked the deal because he didn't want to be seen a trading away a future Hall of Fame player for prospects to his fans so why would he let him go for free. It was never about the money, it was about the hit on the team's reputation for letting a player like Griffey get away (most likely to the casual fans, since this deals seems to be as good for the Reds as it is for the Sox baseball wise)

Optipessimism
08-03-2005, 06:31 PM
I don't see the Reds letting Griffey go on a waiver claim for nothing. The reports mentioned in this thread said the owner blocked the deal because he didn't want to be seen a trading away a future Hall of Fame player for prospects to his fans so why would he let him go for free. It was never about the money, it was about the hit on the team's reputation for letting a player like Griffey get away (most likely to the casual fans, since this deals seems to be as good for the Reds as it is for the Sox baseball wise)

If I were part of Reds ownership I would see trading a future Hall of Famer for high prospects (or at least one) as a step in the right direction. I don't understand why fans in the city would be against that. I mean, would you rather see a Hall of Famer playing on a garbage team going nowhere or a team full of young players that can only get better?

mjmcend
08-03-2005, 06:34 PM
If I were part of Reds ownership I would see trading a future Hall of Famer for high prospects (or at least one) as a step in the right direction. I don't understand why fans in the city would be against that. I mean, would you rather see a Hall of Famer playing on a garbage team going nowhere or a team full of young players that can only get better?

If I were in that ownership group I would see things exactly as you do. By looks of thier message board at least the more hardcore fans agree with us as well. Hopefully the Reds owner will wise up over the next month.

SomebodyToldMe
08-03-2005, 09:56 PM
This thread is getting my hopes up...I have to leave now!

MRKARNO
08-03-2005, 11:02 PM
The one thing about Griffey that really scares me is that his 373 at bats so far this year in Cincy are the most he's had in five years. He has been very injury prone over the past five years. In only one season in Cincy has he played more than 130 games (his first). I'd definitely take a healthy Griffey any day of the week, but what is to say that he's going to stay healthy? We could be on the hook for a lot of money if he gets hurt.

I know the desire is there to "win now" but you also want to be smart about it at the same time and not kill your chances of contending again in the near future. As much as I want the Sox to win the World Series this year, I wouldn't gamble too much. I would like to see this team in a position to contend for the World Series for years to come and taking on the Griffey contract may impact that, for the good or possibly for the bad.

We need a really good lefty bat. There's no question in my mind about that. But is this a risk that's entirely worth it? I'm not so sure. I would have mixed feelings if we did end up getting Griffey, especially if we had to give up on Chris Young, who has the power to be an absolute star in Chicago (if he can avoid a Borchard-esque K-rate).

Lip Man 1
08-03-2005, 11:06 PM
I didn't want to start a separate thread for this but if the mods feel it's significant enough then feel free to do so.

Regarding the 'almost' Griffey deal...

These are the items passed along to me from a source in the Chicago media. They have been working the evening trying to track this down and have been contacting sources in the Cincinnati media. Take it for what it's worth:

This from the Cincinnati writer at MLB.com


"USA Today reported in its Wednesday editions that the Reds had a trade of Ken Griffey Jr. worked out with the White Sox, only to be vetoed by owner and CEO Carl Lindner.

As is his policy, general manager Dan O'Brien declined to comment on trade rumors involving specific players on his club. But he did dismiss the rumor as just that -- a rumor.


"As you know, Mr. Griffey is a 10-and-five player [who can veto any trade]," O'Brien said. "And as we stand here today, we have not had a conversation with him [about any trade]."

and here is a seond item:

"The Dayton paper, which is probably the best source on this
considering who their baseball writer is, is going to write that there was
nothing to this Griffey rumor and that he wouldn't agree to play for the
White Sox anyway."

I am also picking up some unconfirmed talk WHICH MUST BE CONSIDERED A RUMOR (point of emphasis!) that some in Cincinnati are claiming that this was a 'staged' report by Williams. (I personally find it hard to believe that Kenny would do something that underhanded myself.)

Lip

santo=dorf
08-03-2005, 11:19 PM
Bruce Levine said his very good source close to Griffey said he wouldn't approve a trade to the Sox due to the simple fact that the Sox train in Arizona and Griffey's house is in Florida.

Pretty lame Junior..... :mad:

Flight #24
08-03-2005, 11:50 PM
Got this from redszone.com, supposedly from the Dayton news FWIW:





All parties deny Griffey-to–White Sox trade report

By Hal McCoy

Dayton Daily News

CINCINNATI | Ken Griffey Jr. was not traded. Period. Paragraph. End of story.

A report in USA Today said that Griffey was traded to the Chicago White Sox on Saturday, but that Cincinnati Reds CEO Carl Lindner squashed the deal.

The report was denied Wednesday by Reds General Manager Dan O'Brien, Griffey, Brian Goldberg (Griffey's Cincinnati-based agent) and White Sox officials.

...

Griffey said he hadn't heard word one about a trade.

"I heard the White Sox were interested in me, and that's a very good team," said Griffey. "But ... spring training in Tucson?"

For the Reds to trade Griffey anywhere, they need his approval, and Griffey was genuinely surprised when asked if he heard he was traded to the White Sox.

...

Griffey has given the Reds a list of, "Three or four teams," to which he would accept a trade and the White Sox are not on that list.

Griffey's agent, Goldberg, was as surprised as Griffey by the report.



FWIW. I'd still be surprised that Griff would rather stay with the Reds than have a realistic shot at a title, plus wasn't he really close to Frank back in the day? I recall something like them being godparents for each others kids or something. I would've thought that would make coming to the Sox more attractive (or at least that Frank could put some pressure on him to come over).

It could all be KW psoturing, hopefully it doesn't backfire in terms of Griffey being pissed and refusing to allow a trade.

Optipessimism
08-03-2005, 11:57 PM
I'd still be surprised that Griff would rather stay with the Reds than have a realistic shot at a title...

Who cares? Somebody just needs to forge some paperwork and I'll kidnap the bastard and drive him to the Cell myself.

TheOldRoman
08-04-2005, 12:24 AM
Bruce Levine said his very good source close to Griffey said he wouldn't approve a trade to the Sox due to the simple fact that the Sox train in Arizona and Griffey's house is in Florida.

Pretty lame Junior..... :mad:

Levineline has proven himself to be so absolutely full of crap that there is no way anything in his statement above is true. First of all, he is not an insider, he is a Cub loving moron. The only people he "knows" other than Kenny Williams are all Cubs front office people. He was saying last night "Palmiero is a good friend of mine." Absolute BS. I don't know what Levine was doing the last time Palmiero played for the Cubs (was he the ESPN insider then?), but I doubt they formed a friendship.
Levine may want to seem important claiming "Griffey wouldn't come here", but he is making it up. He doesn't know any sources close to Griffey. Junior has said repeatedly the last few months that he wants a ring more than anything else. I doubt he would rather wallow in the baseball hell that is Cincy for three more years than win a title or two and spend three months total in Arizona. Junior is used to it because the Mariners train in Phoenix, and most importantly, he could buy a house in AZ for spring training. He could buy a house in every city he plays in. That is not usually the type of thing that breaks deals. Whether or not Griffey would come here, Levine completely made this up to cover for the fact that he had no idea the Sox were going after Griffey.
Levine is worthless. Every Sox "report" consists of "Kenny can't do this, cant do that, this guy will never come here, they will never be able to get this guy, etc" while his Cubs reports are all "Hendry is seriously looking at this great player, the Cubs are thinking about getting this great player, everybody wants to play for the Cubs, etc."
This isn't the first time that he completely missed a story on the Sox and then lied to cover his arse. There were strong rumors that came out saying the Sox were looking at these players, and since he didn't get that scoop while spending his days on Clark and Addison, he denied it furiously.

Foulke You
08-04-2005, 02:02 AM
I am also picking up some unconfirmed talk WHICH MUST BE CONSIDERED A RUMOR (point of emphasis!) that some in Cincinnati are claiming that this was a 'staged' report by Williams. (I personally find it hard to believe that Kenny would do something that underhanded myself.)

Lip
I find that hard to believe as well. Kenny does not strike me as the type who would waste his time with such a venture. What good would it do? It's not like Sox fans think he is doing a lousy job and he has to sell to the fans that he is working hard. He assembled a team that is 30+ games over .500, why would he "leak" a story about him pursuing Griffey? To impress us? I don't buy it.

I also don't buy that Griffey would not come to the White Sox. If a deal was in place, he would've come here.

harwar
08-04-2005, 07:33 AM
Levineline has proven himself to be so absolutely full of crap that there is no way anything in his statement above is true. First of all, he is not an insider, he is a Cub loving moron. The only people he "knows" other than Kenny Williams are all Cubs front office people.
Levine is worthless. Every Sox "report" consists of "Kenny can't do this, cant do that, this guy will never come here, they will never be able to get this guy, etc" while his Cubs reports are all "Hendry is seriously looking at this great player, the Cubs are thinking about getting this great player, everybody wants to play for the Cubs, etc."
This isn't the first time that he completely missed a story on the Sox and then lied to cover his arse. There were strong rumors that came out saying the Sox were looking at these players, and since he didn't get that scoop while spending his days on Clark and Addison, he denied it furiously.

Yea,i don't trust that guy at all.
He always seems to put a negative slant on his White Sox reports.
On their show after the White Sox post-game show,Levine said to Bryan,that since your a bigger Sox fan you talk about the White Sox and i'll talk about the cubs.

harwar
08-04-2005, 07:38 AM
I also remember that KW did try to aquire Larry Walker last year but walker blocked the deal by invoking his no-trade clause.
Maybe now,things will be different because we are most definitely going to play well into october this year.

munchman33
08-04-2005, 09:10 AM
I also remember that KW did try to aquire Larry Walker last year but walker blocked the deal by invoking his no-trade clause.


Ditto Carlos Delgado.

Brian26
08-04-2005, 10:45 AM
Yea,i don't trust that guy at all.
He always seems to put a negative slant on his White Sox reports.
On their show after the White Sox post-game show,Levine said to Bryan,that since your a bigger Sox fan you talk about the White Sox and i'll talk about the cubs.

Just a funny aside to this. Last night I was setting the alarm clock before bed, and Levine and Dolgin were still on the air. Just as I turned off the clock radio, Dolgin asked Levine if he's ever seen U2 live in concert. My wife just started cracking up at this line, since she's seen Levine a couple of times of Comcast Sportsnet and thinks he's 100 years old. I couldn't help but laugh too- Levine at a U2 concert? Give me a break, Dolgin.

Fungo
08-04-2005, 03:39 PM
Story in today's Dayton Daily News have Reds owners saying the rumor was totally false. Registration required or bugmenot info...

Name: dayton
Email: dayton@mailinator.com
Password: dayton

http://www.daytondailynews.com/sports/content/sports/reds/daily/0804redsnotes.html?UrAuth=%60NYNUOcNXUbTTUWUXUTUZT ZUbUWU]UcUZUaUZUcTYWYWZV

"My reaction is short and sweet," said O'Brien. "Throughout July we had no conversations with Griffey or his agent about his 10-and-5 status, and that says it all. We were consistent in indicating we wanted to keep our outfield intact, and that's where it stands."

Griffey said he hadn't heard word one about a trade.

"I heard the White Sox were interested in me, and that's a very good team," said Griffey. "But ... spring training in Tucson?"

For the Reds to trade Griffey anywhere, they need his approval, and Griffey was genuinely surprised when asked if he heard he was traded to the White Sox.

"I hadn't heard that," he said. "I hadn't heard about any kind of trade. But I did think it odd that the front office told Kent Mercker, David Weathers and Adam Dunn they wouldn't be traded, but nobody said anything to me. And nobody asked me or my agent anything about going to any other team."

Griffey has given the Reds a list of, "Three or four teams," to which he would accept a trade and the White Sox are not on that list.

oeo
08-04-2005, 03:54 PM
Griffey has reasoning of not coming to the Sox because where they hold Spring Training at? Oh come on...what a loser, you have plenty of time for Florida.

soltrain21
08-04-2005, 04:10 PM
Major League Baseball players are some of the biggest babies in the world.


Don't like where ST is held? *****.

oldcomiskey
08-04-2005, 04:46 PM
http://www.thetimesonline.com/articles/2005/08/04/sports/pro_sports/59d8745fe6090e3586257053000702d5.txt

who would go if this were to happen?

spiffie
08-04-2005, 05:18 PM
If the Dayton article is accurate, then the hell with him and I hope KW breaks off any talks he might have been pursuing with the Reds. Remember the Cubs and their courting of Fred McGriff and how well that works out. I'll take a less talented guy who wants to be here over some prima donna who needs to be begged to come play for the best team in baseball.

Shame poor Griff had to be so old and broken down and never be the stud he was supposed to be. He's a very good player, but 20 years from now he won't be one of the first names mentioned of this generation (and he's no Frank Thomas)

Jjav829
08-04-2005, 05:23 PM
Shame poor Griff had to be so old and broken down and never be the stud he was supposed to be. He's a very good player, but 20 years from now he won't be one of the first names mentioned of this generation (and he's no Frank Thomas)

Are you kidding? Never was a stud? The guy was probably the best all-around player of the 90s! He was a complete five-tool player and a star in the 90s. He will absolutely be one of the first players talked about in this generation. You are way off if you honestly believe what you typed.

As for him wanting to be on a team that has Spring Training in Florida, I can understand that. Griffey, unlike other superstars who claim this, legitimately wants to be around his family. Having Spring Training in Florida gives him an 5-6 weeks to spend with his family.

I say we just move our Spring Training to Florida. :D:

mr_genius
08-04-2005, 05:29 PM
Are you kidding? Never was a stud? The guy was probably the best all-around player of the 90s! He was a complete five-tool player and a star in the 90s. He will absolutely be one of the first players talked about in this generation. You are way off if you honestly believe what you typed.

i totally agree, Griffey was a true 5 tool player with stunning offensive numbers

As for him wanting to be on a team that has Spring Training in Florida, I can understand that. Griffey, unlike other superstars who claim this, legitimately wants to be around his family. Having Spring Training in Florida gives him an 5-6 weeks to spend with his family.



i disagree, being away from your family during much of the season and spring training is part of the job. part of his very well paid job to play a game

:redneck

Soxzilla
08-04-2005, 09:54 PM
If the Dayton article is accurate, then the hell with him and I hope KW breaks off any talks he might have been pursuing with the Reds. Remember the Cubs and their courting of Fred McGriff and how well that works out. I'll take a less talented guy who wants to be here over some prima donna who needs to be begged to come play for the best team in baseball.

Shame poor Griff had to be so old and broken down and never be the stud he was supposed to be. He's a very good player, but 20 years from now he won't be one of the first names mentioned of this generation (and he's no Frank Thomas)

You're joking right?

basilesox
08-05-2005, 12:45 AM
I was just listening to Phil Rogers on the Radio and he said something about the fact that Griffey would never come here because we train in Arizona.

I don't get this why is Griffey so anti-Arizona. Whats the difference in Arizona and Florida. I was curious to know if anybody had any information on this. Sounds like BS to me.

To the Mods: Please don't merge with other Griffey thread.

mike squires
08-05-2005, 12:52 AM
Sounds good to me. No explanation necessary!

CLR01
08-05-2005, 12:54 AM
It has been discussed in the Reds deal thread. His family is in Flordia and he wants to be close. Merged it is.

basilesox
08-05-2005, 01:04 AM
It has been discussed in the Reds deal thread. His family is in Flordia and he wants to be close. Merged it is.

Oh I guess I should have asked you to Merge it if I didn't want it to be merged . LOL

Anyways, Who cares? Spring Training is only like a month and a half. I think that is just ridiculous.

basilesox
08-05-2005, 01:07 AM
If the Dayton article is accurate, then the hell with him and I hope KW breaks off any talks he might have been pursuing with the Reds. Remember the Cubs and their courting of Fred McGriff and how well that works out. I'll take a less talented guy who wants to be here over some prima donna who needs to be begged to come play for the best team in baseball.

Shame poor Griff had to be so old and broken down and never be the stud he was supposed to be. He's a very good player, but 20 years from now he won't be one of the first names mentioned of this generation (and he's no Frank Thomas)

I have noticed something. The bigger and bigger this site has become the more members that we have that don't know *** they are talking about. This might be the most ridiculous post of the year.

CLR01
08-05-2005, 03:57 AM
Oh I guess I should have asked you to Merge it if I didn't want it to be merged . LOL

Anyways, Who cares? Spring Training is only like a month and a half. I think that is just ridiculous.


It would have been merged regardless of what you wrote.



Sure spring training is only a month and a half long but the season is 6 months. If I had to leave my family for 6 months every year I would want to spend that month and a half close to them as well.

Flight #24
08-05-2005, 09:27 AM
Sure spring training is only a month and a half long but the season is 6 months. If I had to leave my family for 6 months every year I would want to spend that month and a half close to them as well.

While this is 100% true, the indication it gives is that winning a title is not important enough to take 3 more months over the next 3 years away from his family.

IMO that reflects poorly on Griffey as a competitor. And it might actually indicate that he may not be a great fit in a clubhouse where the mantra s "win or die trying".

On a related note: this makes me wonder if perhaps he hasn't been as dedicated to being in the best of shape throughout his career, resulting in more injuries. It's pure speculation, but one of the differences I've noticed in sports between the all-time greats and the "coulda-beens" is the competitiveness that drives them to be the best by working like madmen in the offseason.

spiffie
08-05-2005, 09:50 AM
I have noticed something. The bigger and bigger this site has become the more members that we have that don't know *** they are talking about. This might be the most ridiculous post of the year.
Eh, I admit I undersold him in anger at reading about his refusal to come here, but honestly, I feel like the amount of injuries he has had will consign him to that "what might have been" category, despite having great numbers. Maybe it's because expectations were so high for him, but think back to the mid-90's when everyone talked about him as a lock for 700+ hr's and to be the greatest CF of all time. When he was THE face of MLB as a young, seemingly always happy to be out there player. Now when you hear the name Ken Griffey Jr. what do you think of? Personally, I think of the constant injuries, the frustration with his inability to ever seemingly stay healthy, the way he's been rendered kind of invisible ever since the move to Cincinnati. Admittedly, there is no shame in being one of the best players of your generation, but where once it looked like he would be head and shoulders above the rest, now he's going to be one of a group of players looked at pretty similarly. 15 years from now when people are looking at this era he'll get put below Bonds and in the same space as Thomas, Bagwell, Sosa, Palmeiro, Rodriguez, McGwire and who know who else of his peers will continue on to great numbers.

So yes, I spoke in anger. It's the effect of month after month of seemingly everyone outside of the Sox fanbase ripping on our team no matter how well we do.

That said, I do stand by saying if he doesn't want to be here, we're better off without him. We don't need anyone here who is going to be half-hearted about this season.

nedlug
08-05-2005, 09:53 AM
I have noticed something. The bigger and bigger this site has become the more members that we have that don't know *** they are talking about. This might be the most ridiculous post of the year.

http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/us/sp/v/mlb/players/5/5073.jpg

"Told you so!"

balke
08-05-2005, 06:15 PM
There's a lot of ESPN speculation that talks are still on about the Sox acquiring Griffey. Its obvious this is the kind of move the Sox need, and its obvious the Reds need to DUMP AS MUCH SALARY AS POSSIBLE. Cause you know, they suck and are in the same division as the Cards.

Before, I was a little hesitant to support a move like Griffey because 50million dollars is a heck of a lot. I think if anything Griff might be a rental though... he doesn't even seem to want to come to the Sox. Perhaps we could re-deal him if everything goes according to plan (World Series).

Anyways, its pretty interesting talks are still on. The Sox would look much better with a new bat in the order. I don't think Griffey is superman anymore, but he's still a power #'s guy who can hit .290 and play the field. Keep the fingers crossed I guess. There would probably be a log jam of OFer's if we acquired Griff, but I'm sure we could make Due sending Timo to the waiver Wire.

Rooney4Prez56
08-05-2005, 07:30 PM
What's wrong with Rowand, Dye, and Pods? Why are the Sox even thinking about a guy who's ridiculously expensive and WILL disrupt the team chemistry? Also, he's getting older and is very injury-prone. I hope this is just a rumor.

Mohoney
08-05-2005, 08:13 PM
How in the heck did Walker fall to the Cards last August? I am sure there were teams willing to block that deal just like there are teams willing to block Jr. to the SOX.

Because only NL teams could block.

Soxzilla
08-05-2005, 10:24 PM
What's wrong with Rowand, Dye, and Pods? Why are the Sox even thinking about a guy who's ridiculously expensive and WILL disrupt the team chemistry? Also, he's getting older and is very injury-prone. I hope this is just a rumor.

He won't disrupt team chemistry. Ken Griffey Jr. is a great guy, who, more than likely would come to the White Sox if he had the chance (I believe the initial reports, over the other reports...because frankly, Linder and his cronnies can bite my sack).

Griffey Jr. will also, more than likely, DH more often then play CF.

Domeshot17
08-06-2005, 03:22 AM
Well I have taken a little pride in being a newbie who believes he has somewhat of a clue.

I hate this thread because it is Complete speculation. When asked about it Griffey seemed to kind of appear to never have been asked. I know Cincy has it's up and downs for Griff, but I also firmly believe Griffey would kill for another chance at a world series. Back in the day Him and Big Frank were good friends, so if it came down to it, a serious phone call from Frank asking him to come here may be helpful.

Truth be told, as to the several wonders as to what Griffey could do for us, tonight was a clear example. He is instant offensive improvement over Everett and Blum. We got Blum to play a few games a week and back up Crede if he was hurting again, and he has started every game since tuesday I believe. I like his glove, and I like him as a role player, but starting everyday is not helping us. Sure a guy like Aubrey Huff may be a better fit, but with Waiver he is unrealistic.

Griffeys contract makes him very realistic. New York needs a CF, but they have so many OLD players under BAD contracts I do not see Cashman actively persuing Griff, especially with the asking price being prospects and the yanks new approach of not dealing them. The Red Sox do not need a CF or a DH, and neither Griffey nor Damon would move over. The Angels are solid and expensive in the OF, and the A's cant pay him. The Twins wouldnt block it for the sole fact if they got stuck with Griffey they have ZERO room for him next year. You run down the NL and the only team I see that could realistically put out a claim would be Houston, and then it falls back into the Reds unwillingness to trade within their division.

The other sticking point is what it does for Griffs Career. Him Dhing 3 days a week could realistically add another 2 years on his career, giving him more realistic shots at 600-650 home runs and a chance to win a ring. He doesnt end up in a pitchers park, and Chicago from Cincy is a drive, but it is not like going from Cincy to New York or California.

Griffey is what we need. He is experienced, He is talented, He is a leader and He is a great guy in the club house. He is fun but very competitive, and would be an ideal fit for us.

Erik The Red
08-06-2005, 08:04 AM
^ So, you hate this thread because it's "complete speculation", then you go on to speculate about the possibility of Griffey coming to the Sox.

:rolleyes:

UofCSoxFan
08-06-2005, 11:16 AM
Waaaaaaaaaaay off topic but I saw HawkQuarters downtown had a Khabibulan 05 authentic jersey in their window....kinda cool that they had something already.

Frater Perdurabo
08-06-2005, 12:25 PM
Just because the Reds GM did not talk to Griffey about a trade to the White Sox doesn't mean that the GM didn't agree to trade him to the Sox, only to be denied by the team's owner.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

It seems to me the most logical way to do things if I was the Reds GM would be:

Step 1. Negotiate and agree in principle to a trade with Kenny Williams;

Step 2. Obtain permission from the Reds' owner to trade Griffey and assume some of the contract;

Step 3. If the owner agreed, THEN ask Griffey if he would agree to go to the Sox.

There would be no reason for the Reds GM to ask Griffey about a deal if he had not secured the owners' permission to assume a portion of the contract! Why get a player worked up about a possible deal if you did not yet have the owners' permission to spend his money? It would be something entirely different if Griffey took the initative to ask the GM about trade rumours. Then you have to tell him. But there's no reason to involve the player until all other matters are settled.

Based on the information provided so far, it seems to me the deal perhaps broke down at Step 2. If so, it's possible all the reports we've read technically could be true.

Evman5
08-06-2005, 12:36 PM
:tomatoaward:tomatoaward

200 and counting...

pythons007
08-08-2005, 09:35 AM
I don't have access to ESPN insider but they are saying that the WhiteSox are interested in Griffey. Does anyone have any info on this??

BeviBall!
08-08-2005, 09:39 AM
Who is this Griffey of which you speak?

Seriously, there's probably a 500 post thread on this somewhere else. I'll simplify it for you: Don't Hold Your Breath.

Jerko
08-08-2005, 09:41 AM
Do you actually think the Sox win that game yesterday w/Griffey in center? He would have either not made that catch, or got injured on that play that Rowand made. We can always DH him I guess.

BeviBall!
08-08-2005, 09:54 AM
His kind of town?
Aug 4 - The White Sox are still in hot pursuit of the Reds' Ken Griffey Jr., the Chicago Sun-Times reports. Chicago reportedly had been trying to land the 35-year-old center fielder before the non-waiver deadline.

According to The Chicago Tribune, Griffey is owed $12.5 million each year through 2008. The Reds hold a $16.5 million option or $4 million buyout for 2009.

Randar68
08-08-2005, 09:59 AM
Do you actually think the Sox win that game yesterday w/Griffey in center? He would have either not made that catch, or got injured on that play that Rowand made. We can always DH him I guess.

Ahh yes, based on one speculative play...

Nevermind his .290 average, better instincts, and LH'd bat in the middle of the order...

But nevermind, those wouldn't have made a difference at any point now or in the future, right? Because Aaron ran into another wall... do I have it correct?
:rolleyes:

balke
08-08-2005, 10:12 AM
Ahh yes, based on one speculative play...

Nevermind his .290 average, better instincts, and LH'd bat in the middle of the order...

But nevermind, those wouldn't have made a difference at any point now or in the future, right? Because Aaron ran into another wall... do I have it correct?
:rolleyes:


Nevermind Rowands' .289 avg. Nevermind Griffey's .281 avg.

Better instincts? I'm not sure, does rowand's speed and arm make up for it? I wouldn't say Rowand has bad instincts. Griff was the best defender in baseball, but nowadays he has to rest every 10 days or so because everyone is afraid he's going to break something. I think as far as hits and defensive play, they are about equal. Griffey has more power. I'd like Griffey as a super DH/outfield platooner. We'd only want him for power, which is opposite of Ozzie ball philosophy. The best situation would be if we could trade minor leaguers for Griff.

Flight #24
08-08-2005, 10:14 AM
Ahh yes, based on one speculative play...

Nevermind his .290 average, better instincts, and LH'd bat in the middle of the order...

But nevermind, those wouldn't have made a difference at any point now or in the future, right? Because Aaron ran into another wall... do I have it correct?
:rolleyes:

Or the fact that maybe, just maybe if we had Griffey in the lineup instead of Timo, the game might not have come down to that one play?

Nah, probably not.
:rolleyes:

GAsoxfan
08-08-2005, 10:57 AM
The best situation would be if we could trade minor leaguers for Griff.

That's what the trade supposedly was.

The Dude
08-08-2005, 11:09 AM
Or the fact that maybe, just maybe if we had Griffey in the lineup instead of Timo, the game might not have come down to that one play?

Nah, probably not.
:rolleyes:

Ahh Timo, the game's difference maker. How could we ever replace him??

munchman33
08-08-2005, 11:11 AM
Do you actually think the Sox win that game yesterday w/Griffey in center? He would have either not made that catch, or got injured on that play that Rowand made. We can always DH him I guess.

You actually think we only score 3 runs with a power-hitting lefty?

We can play this game all day.

Randar68
08-08-2005, 11:12 AM
Nevermind Rowands' .289 avg. Nevermind Griffey's .281 avg.


Do you want to play this game? Griffey has how many RBI? HR? What's his OPS?

*****. Rowand is a #6 hitter. Griffey would be the best offensive player in this lineup by a fair margin.

We'd only want him for power, which is opposite of Ozzie ball philosophy

You're right, his OBP, the threat of a LH'er in the order, and his ability to drive in runs really don't do anything for the team, even in "Smartball", do they?

1917
08-08-2005, 11:22 AM
I vote we put this thread to rest...he ain't coming so no use arguing over anything

balke
08-08-2005, 11:34 AM
Do you want to play this game? Griffey has how many RBI? HR? What's his OPS?

*****. Rowand is a #6 hitter. Griffey would be the best offensive player in this lineup by a fair margin.



You're right, his OBP, the threat of a LH'er in the order, and his ability to drive in runs really don't do anything for the team, even in "Smartball", do they?


I'm thinking in terms of "replacing" Rowand. As in we trade Rowand for Griffey. And you're the one who got the stats wrong on Griff, its only fair to Rowand to point out Rowand is actually the one hitting .290. If you meant Career Batting avg, they are both at .290 career. I want Griffey, I'd like to keep Rowand in Center with the deal. Griff's OBP is like .016 higher than Rowand's.

I'm not trying to play a game, just keeping the facts straight. Its unfair to say Rowand has bad instincts as if Griffey is still superman IMO. Its more than one catch at the wall that Rowand has made this season as far as big plays go.

Also, I already said we want Griffey for his power #'s, which is all the stats you just asked me for... If you really want them, they are 23 Hr's, 26 2B's, 72 RBI, .886 OPS. I'd love to have those on the team. I'd also like Rowand's D available in Center, and a the switch hitting Carl as a great PHer come playoff time. Ultimately, I'd like Timo off the team, replaced by Carl as the outfield relief/pinch hitter.

balke
08-08-2005, 11:36 AM
I vote we put this thread to rest...he ain't coming so no use arguing over anything


Most likely he's not. It would make us the most complete/feared team in baseball if he did though IMO. I can see him wanting to play here for one year, but he'd probably say no since he'd be under contract with us for so long.

mdep524
08-10-2005, 04:36 PM
From his Major League Report in today's USAtoday.com this afternoon:
EARS WIDE OPEN

Cincinnati Reds center fielder Ken Griffey Jr. talked to his family last weekend and says he may be open to accepting a trade to the Chicago White Sox, if he clears waivers.

The White Sox and Reds completed a deal before the non-waiver deadline that would have sent outfielder Chris Young, first baseman Casey Rogowski and prospects to Cincinnati for Griffey. The trade included the Reds picking up at least $15 million of Griffey's remaining $41.5 million through 2008. But after the deal was completed and approved by White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf and Reds president John Allen, Reds owner Carl Lindner nixed the deal the following day.

Six high-ranking White Sox and Reds officials, including those close to Reinsdorf and Allen, confirmed the deal. The teams plan to revisit the deal if Lindner changes his mind.

"Junior is open to the possibility," said Brian Goldberg, Griffey's agent. "Originally, it caught us by surprise because we didn't know anything about it until we read it. We originally gave the Reds three teams that we would accept a deal (believed to be the Yankees, Braves and Astros), but that's not to say we wouldn't listen to the White Sox.

"Junior's first reaction is that the town is fine, the organization is fine, the people that run the organization are fine, but the only issue is that he'll be spending six weeks in Tucson (the White Sox's spring-training site in Arizona). But that doesn't preclude us from listening. And he will listen."
Whole story here: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/bbw/columnist/nightengale/2005-08-09-major-league-report_x.htm

Think Griffey caught a whiff of White Sox mania while in Chicago this week?

Actually, I'm more convinced now that he will NOT clear waivers. The more public this becomes the more likely it is for the Yankees/Red Sox, etc. to make a claim and block the deal, knowing the Reds probably won't let him go for nothing.

Still interesting though.

Flight #24
08-10-2005, 04:49 PM
From his Major League Report in today's USAtoday.com this afternoon:

Whole story here: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/bbw/columnist/nightengale/2005-08-09-major-league-report_x.htm

Think Griffey caught a whiff of White Sox mania while in Chicago this week?

Actually, I'm more convinced now that he will NOT clear waivers. The more public this becomes the more likely it is for the Yankees/Red Sox, etc. to make a claim and block the deal, knowing the Reds probably won't let him go for nothing.

Still interesting though.

*#*%&*(#&#......why in heck can't this type of thing happen BEFORE the deadline......

You're right, no chance that the Spankees/BoSox let him slide past them on waivers. Esp the Yankees given their OF D as witnessed by King George today.

GAsoxfan
08-10-2005, 04:55 PM
Why do you have to get hopes up?

Paulwny
08-10-2005, 05:15 PM
*#*%&*(#&#......why in heck can't this type of thing happen BEFORE the deadline......

You're right, no chance that the Spankees/BoSox let him slide past them on waivers. Esp the Yankees given their OF D as witnessed by King George today.


After King George saw Rowand run down balls in this series and then see Bernie Williams impersonate Konerko, running after Uribe's triple, he'll be all over Griffey.
Put the blame on Rowand.

Domeshot17
08-10-2005, 05:30 PM
The yankees and astros would probably make a claim, but I honestly highly doubt Boston would. They have enough OF and Ortiz DH, and with the Theo wanting to get out from under Mannys contract, does he want one of the next highest paid players right next to him? The Yankees might claim, but keep in mind they have had a big change this year, not wanting to add Salary-Age while keeping their youth. If Cashman is being honest about the team not wanting to add anymore salary, then he might slip through. The Astros also could be interested because they need the offense, but the Reds have the rep of not being willing to trade within their division.

TomBradley72
08-10-2005, 07:51 PM
Interesting that this was one of his main concerns (from the USA Today article):

"the only issue is that he'll be spending six weeks in Tucson (the White Sox's spring-training site in Arizona). But that doesn't preclude us from listening. And he will listen."

Flight #24
08-10-2005, 08:10 PM
The yankees and astros would probably make a claim, but I honestly highly doubt Boston would. They have enough OF and Ortiz DH, and with the Theo wanting to get out from under Mannys contract, does he want one of the next highest paid players right next to him? The Yankees might claim, but keep in mind they have had a big change this year, not wanting to add Salary-Age while keeping their youth. If Cashman is being honest about the team not wanting to add anymore salary, then he might slip through. The Astros also could be interested because they need the offense, but the Reds have the rep of not being willing to trade within their division.

Here's why Theo might claim him:
1) The Reds are unlikely to let him go for nothing, esp not if they think they can deal him for something in the offseason, which is likely

2) Damon's an FA, he could see Griff on a 3-yr deal with $6mil deferred as a decent signing (Cash flow wise, it's Jermaine Dye $$$). Alternately, they could still resign Damon, move Griff to DH, and put Ortiz back at first effectively replacing Olerud/Millar with Griffey.

Hopefully not tho.

Ol' No. 2
08-10-2005, 08:16 PM
Here's why Theo might claim him:
1) The Reds are unlikely to let him go for nothing, esp not if they think they can deal him for something in the offseason, which is likely

2) Damon's an FA, he could see Griff on a 3-yr deal with $6mil deferred as a decent signing (Cash flow wise, it's Jermaine Dye $$$). Alternately, they could still resign Damon, move Griff to DH, and put Ortiz back at first effectively replacing Olerud/Millar with Griffey.

Hopefully not tho.I don't see any conceivable way the Yankees would pass on Griffey. They have a huge gaping hole in CF. Bernie Williams is off the books next year and his $12M would nicely offset Griffey's money.

balke
08-10-2005, 08:30 PM
Here's why Theo might claim him:
1) The Reds are unlikely to let him go for nothing, esp not if they think they can deal him for something in the offseason, which is likely

2) Damon's an FA, he could see Griff on a 3-yr deal with $6mil deferred as a decent signing (Cash flow wise, it's Jermaine Dye $$$). Alternately, they could still resign Damon, move Griff to DH, and put Ortiz back at first effectively replacing Olerud/Millar with Griffey.

Hopefully not tho.



I don't know about that. The Bosox are already talking about how they can't afford Damon's asking price for next season. I can't see them adding payroll like that to their team, they have enough power hitters in the lineup. I know they need an outfielder pretty badly, but I think they'd have to pass, or at least I hope they would have to. Our lineup would have so much versatility with a player like Griff on the team with all of our starters. So many lefty/righty combos you could do. Hopefully Griff would be willing to play positions other than just CF.

Flight #24
08-10-2005, 08:32 PM
I don't see any conceivable way the Yankees would pass on Griffey. They have a huge gaping hole in CF. Bernie Williams is off the books next year and his $12M would nicely offset Griffey's money.

Unless they're sold on Korey Patterson.....

Or more realistically, if they're actually operating with some semblance of a budget and want to put any available savings into their joke of a starting rotation and bigger joke of middle relief.

But most likely, you're right. The other way in which Lindner screwed the Sox is that teams now know that if he wasn't willing to do the deal earlier, he's even less likely to do a deal where he gives away Griffey for pure $$$$ savings on waivers. So it's a low-risk block.

Ol' No. 2
08-10-2005, 08:39 PM
Unless they're sold on Korey Patterson.....

Or more realistically, if they're actually operating with some semblance of a budget and want to put any available savings into their joke of a starting rotation and bigger joke of middle relief.

But most likely, you're right. The other way in which Lindner screwed the Sox is that teams now know that if he wasn't willing to do the deal earlier, he's even less likely to do a deal where he gives away Griffey for pure $$$$ savings on waivers. So it's a low-risk block.Kevin Brown is also off the books next year, so they'll have some money available for other needs. They're not going to be satisfied with Bubba Crosby. No one they'd want to plug into CF would come cheaper than Griffey.

DickAllen72
08-10-2005, 08:56 PM
The other way in which Lindner screwed the Sox is that teams now know that if he wasn't willing to do the deal earlier, he's even less likely to do a deal where he gives away Griffey for pure $$$$ savings on waivers. So it's a low-risk block.

Maybe so.

Or, maybe Lindner blocked the trade because he didn't want a chunk of Griffey's salary on the books for years to come while he's playing somewhere else. Maybe Lindner couldn't care less about the prospects, he just would like to get out from unnder Griffey's contract and would jump at a chance to pawn off 100% of the remaining years on someone.

I hope it's the latter. :gulp:

NDSox12
08-10-2005, 09:04 PM
Interesting that this was one of his main concerns (from the USA Today article):

"the only issue is that he'll be spending six weeks in Tucson (the White Sox's spring-training site in Arizona). But that doesn't preclude us from listening. And he will listen."

Yeah, I thought that was strange too. What in the world could he possibly have against Tucson? Maybe he'd rather spend his March in Florida, but that would be a pretty absurd reason to veto a trade.

Flight #24
08-10-2005, 09:18 PM
Yeah, I thought that was strange too. What in the world could he possibly have against Tucson? Maybe he'd rather spend his March in Florida, but that would be a pretty absurd reason to veto a trade.

His family lives in Florida, and he likes having ST there so that he's away from them less.

Admirable from a human perspective, but IMO at this stage in your career he's basically deciding between having 6 weeks with his family but guaranteeing no ring and losing the 6 weeks(although he could bring them out to Tucson), but getting a great shot at a title.

Tragg
08-10-2005, 10:19 PM
"The White Sox and Reds completed a deal before the non-waiver deadline that would have sent outfielder Chris Young, first baseman Casey Rogowski and prospects to Cincinnati for Griffey. The trade included the Reds picking up at least $15 million of Griffey's remaining $41.5 million through 2008. But after the deal was completed and approved by White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf and Reds president John Allen, Reds owner Carl Lindner nixed the deal the following day."

That would have been a ridiculous trade. We pick up $25 million of the money AND give up all those prospects? For that money, he should be free.

Flight #24
08-10-2005, 10:46 PM
"The White Sox and Reds completed a deal before the non-waiver deadline that would have sent outfielder Chris Young, first baseman Casey Rogowski and prospects to Cincinnati for Griffey. The trade included the Reds picking up at least $15 million of Griffey's remaining $41.5 million through 2008. But after the deal was completed and approved by White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf and Reds president John Allen, Reds owner Carl Lindner nixed the deal the following day."

That would have been a ridiculous trade. We pick up $25 million of the money AND give up all those prospects? For that money, he should be free.
Don't confuse quantity with quality. Griffey is a premier hitter, and outside of Young, these prospects are not top-quality. Plus there's his chase of 600HR over the next 2 years. Plus, this trade either involves a)a position of pretty great depth within our system or b)guys who weren't going to see the field barring some strange and horrible circumstance.

Tragg
08-11-2005, 10:33 AM
Don't confuse quantity with quality. Griffey is a premier hitter, and outside of Young, these prospects are not top-quality. Plus there's his chase of 600HR over the next 2 years. Plus, this trade either involves a)a position of pretty great depth within our system or b)guys who weren't going to see the field barring some strange and horrible circumstance.

I still think IF we pick up $25 million he should be free.(especially considering age, injury risk --->the only real reason we'd want him is for a rent to the end of the year).

Young IS a top prospect. Ragowski is a good prospect, second tier, but still good.
Young could hit the field. The one who could be squeezed out is Anderson, whom we either need to play or trade this off-season (which is why I have suggested trading Rowand - a good player with trade value and we have some depth behind him; I note with interest that the Yankee fans seem to think more of him than our fans do). If we keep Rowand, then we need to trade Anderson. So, Young is a couple of years behind, and may have a spot when his time comes.

Flight #24
08-11-2005, 10:59 AM
I still think IF we pick up $25 million he should be free.(especially considering age, injury risk --->the only real reason we'd want him is for a rent to the end of the year).

Young IS a top prospect. Ragowski is a good prospect, second tier, but still good.
Young could hit the field. The one who could be squeezed out is Anderson, whom we either need to play or trade this off-season (which is why I have suggested trading Rowand - a good player with trade value and we have some depth behind him; I note with interest that the Yankee fans seem to think more of him than our fans do). If we keep Rowand, then we need to trade Anderson. So, Young is a couple of years behind, and may have a spot when his time comes.

FWIW - Rogo's good #s are somewhat mitigated by his relatively advanced age for his level, IIRC. Randar or one of the other minor league gurus could confirm/deny that.

Griffey's posting a .900+OPS. That's better than you're getting from Konerko, and with the reported $4.5M/yr coming from the Reds, he'll be at at net salary (before deferrals) of $7.5M, i.e. 1.5M less than Paulie. He's well worth that. Not to mention that he's lefty, faster than Paulie, and can still throw some serious leather if you want to play him in the OF.

Now factor in that a big chunk of that is deferred, and that makes him a great value. That value is offset by injury possibility, but that's lessened with the Sox where he can DH.

Now factor in the fact that he's still a "name" player, and will be chasing 600HR both of which provide a pretty solid bump in publicity/popularity which should translate into revenues.

And to get that, you give up a guy who if he plays for you ever, won't do so for at least 2 years, and who's 3d on the list of guys you have in the minors to fill an OF role at that time. And a guy who'll likely never be more than a part-time player or short-term fillin and a fringe prospect.

It's not a steal, but it's a good deal for the Sox.

TomBradley72
08-11-2005, 11:14 AM
It's all about this year. Griffey could easily be the guy that solidifies our 1st World Championship since 1917. The prospects being discussed are non-issues. We win the World Series....between the increased revenue and ability to attract players....Young, Rogowski, etc....will be easily replaced.

Podsednik, Rowand, Dye and Everett all have some history of injury....and Dye/Everett have age going against them. In my opinion Griffey replaces Frank in terms of his role on the team (a MAJOR upgrade with his ability to play the OF)...and replaces Timo on the current roster. This would be an awesome move for us.

As far as implications for 2006 and beyond....meaningless as far as I'm concerned. This franchise needs a World Series ring.

mdep524
08-11-2005, 11:40 AM
FWIW - Rogo's good #s are somewhat mitigated by his relatively advanced age for his level, IIRC. Randar or one of the other minor league gurus could confirm/deny that.

Griffey's posting a .900+OPS. That's better than you're getting from Konerko, and with the reported $4.5M/yr coming from the Reds, he'll be at at net salary (before deferrals) of $7.5M, i.e. 1.5M less than Paulie. He's well worth that. Not to mention that he's lefty, faster than Paulie, and can still throw some serious leather if you want to play him in the OF.

Now factor in that a big chunk of that is deferred, and that makes him a great value. That value is offset by injury possibility, but that's lessened with the Sox where he can DH.

Now factor in the fact that he's still a "name" player, and will be chasing 600HR both of which provide a pretty solid bump in publicity/popularity which should translate into revenues.

And to get that, you give up a guy who if he plays for you ever, won't do so for at least 2 years, and who's 3d on the list of guys you have in the minors to fill an OF role at that time. And a guy who'll likely never be more than a part-time player or short-term fillin and a fringe prospect.

It's not a steal, but it's a good deal for the Sox.Great summary of the issues, although Rogo probably wouldn't be involved in the trade if it happens this month because of the waivers issue.

Randar68
08-11-2005, 01:16 PM
FWIW - Rogo's good #s are somewhat mitigated by his relatively advanced age for his level, IIRC. Randar or one of the other minor league gurus could confirm/deny that.

Rogo is about average age for AA, and for what he is doing in his first stint in AA, he's religitimized his prospect status. He battled a couple of tough injuries in the 2 seasons prior to last year, and that set him back. Cost him a lot of developmental time in the fall of 2 seasons as well as significant time during seasons in which he was playing hurt most of the time.

maurice
08-11-2005, 02:19 PM
Griffey's posting a .900+OPS. That's better than you're getting from Konerko, and with the reported $4.5M/yr coming from the Reds, he'll be at at net salary (before deferrals) of $7.5M, i.e. 1.5M less than Paulie. He's well worth that. Not to mention that he's lefty, faster than Paulie, and can still throw some serious leather if you want to play him in the OF. Now factor in that a big chunk of that is deferred, and that makes him a great value. That value is offset by injury possibility, but that's lessened with the Sox where he can DH. Now factor in the fact that he's still a "name" player, and will be chasing 600HR both of which provide a pretty solid bump in publicity/popularity which should translate into revenues.

Well put. Young is a Top 5 prospect in the Sox system, and Rogo probably is a Top 10. That being said, IMO, Young probably will be dealt before he reaches the majors for the depth reasons you identified, and the addition of Griffey (and retention of Sweeney) significantly reduces your need for Rogowski. If KW is going to trade these guys, I want to see them traded for a extremely valuable player like Griffey, Helton, or a top-of-the-rotation starter. If JR is willing to take on more $$$ to help appease Reds' management and thereby replace Young with a lower-rated prospect, that would be an outstanding bonus.

The bottom line is that Griffey would be a huge boost THIS YEAR in our biggest area of need: middle-of-the-order run producer.

Flight #24
08-11-2005, 02:24 PM
Rogo is about average age for AA, and for what he is doing in his first stint in AA, he's religitimized his prospect status. He battled a couple of tough injuries in the 2 seasons prior to last year, and that set him back. Cost him a lot of developmental time in the fall of 2 seasons as well as significant time during seasons in which he was playing hurt most of the time.

Ah, I see. So what do you think of this proposed trade? Too much to give up for Griff?

Also, would you rather trade Young or Sweeney? I know Sweeney's supposed to have a ridiculous ceiling, but Young looks like he's already delivering at a stud level. If I just look at the AA stats, I'd rather keep Young. Plus he plays a mean CF (so I hear), so you'd think he's a better bet as an all-around player.

CHIsoxNation
08-11-2005, 02:27 PM
Ah, I see. So what do you think of this proposed trade? Too much to give up for Griff?

Also, would you rather trade Young or Sweeney? I know Sweeney's supposed to have a ridiculous ceiling, but Young looks like he's already delivering at a stud level. If I just look at the AA stats, I'd rather keep Young. Plus he plays a mean CF (so I hear), so you'd think he's a better bet as an all-around player.

I think with the stock of outfielders that Sox have right now they can afford to let Young go in a deal. I'm sure Anderson will be up soon and patrolling the outfield with Rowand. Not to mention a deal like this would leave the Sox with Owens and Sweeney also. You would think that one would have to go.

maurice
08-11-2005, 02:37 PM
Young's ceiling is off the charts. His skillset is ridiculous for a player his age and weight. He's one of those rare players who hits the ball like he's hiding an extra 80 lb. of invisible muscle somewhere in his uniform. The closest current comparison I can come up with is Soriano. These guys have such tremendous power for their weight that it seems like they defy the laws of physics, and they're very fast to boot. OTOH, Young already is a better defensive player than Soriano and probably will walk more if he makes it in the bigs. IMHO, the open question is whether he'll hit for AVE and K < 150 times.

Sweeney's primary advantages over Young are that he's younger at the same level and is a much surer bet to hit for AVE in MLB. That's not to say that Young is old for his level. On the contrary, both players have been pushed along very quickly . . . but Sweeney is one of the youngest players in AA and has lots of time to find his power stroke.

Tragg
08-11-2005, 02:46 PM
Young's ceiling is off the charts. His skillset is ridiculous for a player his age and weight. He's one of those rare players who hits the ball like he's hiding an extra 80 lb. of invisible muscle somewhere in his uniform. The closest current comparison I can come up with is Soriano. These guys have such tremendous power for their weight that it seems like they defy the laws of physics, and they're very fast to boot. OTOH, Young already is a better defensive player than Soriano and probably will walk more if he makes it in the bigs. IMHO, the open question is whether he'll hit for AVE and K < 150 times.


Then why trade Young? Protect your best. That's what we did with Reed - they took #4.

Young isn't the one that is clogging the pipeline because he's a couple of years away; Anderson is pretty ML ready but we already have a CF - that's where the excess lies, imo. I don't see these guys play, so I'm assuming young is our best OF prospect based on what yall say. With griffey, we now have THREE CF. We need to send Anderson to the Reds, not Young, it seems to me. (or Rowand, but in these circumstances, trying to win a WS, we can't send him away; in an off-season trade, that's who I'd trade).


Whoever is the best 1 or 2, protect them. We should be able to do the deal and still protect them, especially as we are taking an ENORMOUS amount of salary - $25 MILLION. That's really unheard of to take on retroactive deferred salary like that.

balke
08-11-2005, 02:52 PM
Then why trade Young? Protect your best. That's what we did with Reed - they took #4.

Young isn't the one that is clogging the pipeline because he's a couple of years away; Anderson is pretty ML ready but we already have a CF - that's where the excess lies, imo. I don't see these guys play, so I'm assuming young is our best OF prospect based on what yall say. Whoever is the best 1 or 2, protect them. We should be able to do the deal and still protect them, especially as we are taking an ENORMOUS amount of salary - $25 MILLION. That's really unheard of to take on retroactive deferred salary like that.



Anderson is our best, and I'm sure next season Timo's gone, Anderson hits the bigs in a role as defensive replacement/4th outfielder so he can adjust to the Majors. Young doesn't have the potential of Anderson. Anderson doesn't HAVE to play CF either. He'd be great insurance for an injury.

Tragg
08-11-2005, 02:55 PM
Anderson is our best, and I'm sure next season Timo's gone, Anderson hits the bigs in a role as defensive replacement/4th outfielder so he can adjust to the Majors. Young doesn't have the potential of Anderson. Anderson doesn't HAVE to play CF either. He'd be great insurance for an injury.

If that's true, then I will relent.
From reading the opining of our minor league experts, I got the impression that Young had the best potential and Anderson possibly the least, although most ML ready.
If we get Griffey, it seems like we need a RF.

Fungo
08-11-2005, 03:04 PM
If that's true, then I will relent.
From reading the opining of our minor league experts, I got the impression that Young had the best potential and Anderson possibly the least, although most ML ready.
If we get Griffey, it seems like we need a RF.Young does have the most potential, like maurice said, his ceiling is off the charts, but Anderson is probably the closest thing, outfield wise , to a sure bet major league player. Young has all the tools, but as we all know, tools don't necessarily make the player. If Young becomes the player he projects to be, he could be a star. Always a big IF though.

maurice
08-11-2005, 03:10 PM
Then why trade Young? Protect your best.

As I implied in post #237, I think that KW agreed to send Young in return for additional cash and that less $$$ would have resulted in lesser prospects. Also, as I mentioned, while Young's ceiling is extraordinary (and higher than Anderson's IMO), there are still some serious questions about whether he'll make it in MLB. Since he's pretty much MLB-ready right now, Anderson is much more of a sure thing and is very talented in his own right. Plus, KW seems to love him. For this reason alone, I expect to see Anderson in CF for the Sox next season, one way or another. Griffey should not play there on a regular basis.

If, for whatever reason, you want to leave Rowand in CF for the long term, either Anderson or Sweeney has the arm to play RF. Young does not; his future is in CF or LF.

Tragg
08-11-2005, 03:12 PM
For this reason alone, I expect to see Anderson in CF for the Sox next season, one way or another. Griffey should not play there on a regular basis.
And Rowand?

Ol' No. 2
08-11-2005, 03:12 PM
Then why trade Young? Protect your best. That's what we did with Reed - they took #4.

Young isn't the one that is clogging the pipeline because he's a couple of years away; Anderson is pretty ML ready but we already have a CF - that's where the excess lies, imo. I don't see these guys play, so I'm assuming young is our best OF prospect based on what yall say. With griffey, we now have THREE CF. We need to send Anderson to the Reds, not Young, it seems to me. (or Rowand, but in these circumstances, trying to win a WS, we can't send him away; in an off-season trade, that's who I'd trade).


Whoever is the best 1 or 2, protect them. We should be able to do the deal and still protect them, especially as we are taking an ENORMOUS amount of salary - $25 MILLION. That's really unheard of to take on retroactive deferred salary like that.Who said anything about taking retroactive deferred salary? Nobody does that.

Tragg
08-11-2005, 03:14 PM
Who said anything about taking retroactive deferred salary? Nobody does that.If we're paying $25 million, that's pretty close to what we're doing. You can add the salary for the years left on his contract and the deferrals related to those years, and they don't total $25 million (I believe the number $12 million was quoted on the early portions of this thread a week or 2 ago).

maurice
08-11-2005, 03:15 PM
And Rowand?

RF or traded.

Ol' No. 2
08-11-2005, 03:16 PM
If we're paying $25 million, that's pretty close to what we're doing. You can add the salary for the years left on his contract and the deferrals related to those years, and they don't total $25 million (I believe the number $12 million was quoted on the early portions of this thread a week or 2 ago).He has 3 years left after 2005 at $12.5M a year, with, I believe a buyout in the 4th year around $4M.