PDA

View Full Version : Deal is done?

cheeses_h_rice
12-12-2001, 04:51 PM
http://boards.espn.go.com/cgi/mlb/request.dll?MESSAGE&room=mlb_ana&id=86585

It says 4 players for Erstad, including Singleton and Garland.

OK, now that is pretty stupid if true...
bringbackrobin
12-12-2001, 04:53 PM
Say it ain't so
OfficerKarkovice
12-12-2001, 04:53 PM
That would suck...I want Giles instead. He is a stud.
Tragg
12-12-2001, 04:57 PM
INdeed a terrible trade. KW always gets taken (except in a one for one minor leaguer situation).;
Pete Ward
12-12-2001, 05:05 PM
Only hope for this FUBAR is if the Angels threw in Ortiz...

Otherwise this Sux big time. Maybe for Giles but noway for Erstad.

Im dissapointed, and pissed. :angry:
FarWestChicago
12-12-2001, 05:05 PM
Originally posted by cheeses_h_rice
http://boards.espn.go.com/cgi/mlb/request.dll?MESSAGE&room=mlb_ana&id=86585

It says 4 players for Erstad, including Singleton and Garland.

OK, now that is pretty stupid if true... You forgot the part about 4 players for Erstad for ONE year. Man, the price of rent-a-players is getting steep. :angry:
KempersRS
12-12-2001, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by FarWestChicago
You forgot the part about 4 players for Erstad for ONE year. Man, the price of rent-a-players is getting steep. :angry:

Man, I would love to go off on this one, but I have a big term paper to work on. Tomorrow there will be some hell raised! :angry:
Daver
12-12-2001, 05:13 PM
This would be a decent trade if it was Kip instead of Garland.

I don't think Garland will ever be a world beater,but Kip has proven he don't hunt.
czalgosz
12-12-2001, 05:24 PM
Well...

I don't know.

Thoughts -

1. Even if Erstad is not re-signed, at least Borchard will be ready by 2003.

2. Losing Singleton is not a big deal.

3. Losing Garland is. This is the only thing that makes me wince about this. Garland quietly put together a very good season last year, albeit in very limited duty. I have a feeling that losing Garland might come back to bite us on the ass.

All in all, I'm going to wait and see who the minor-leaguers are in the deal, and see if the Sox can hold on the Erstad beyond 2002. If the minor-leaguers are no-names and/or if Erstad stays with the Sox (he's only 27) then it's a good deal. If the Sox have to lose Rauch or someone important, then all I have to say is the Sox better win it all in 2002.

I have to give credit to KW for rolling the dice big-time (assuming that it's true). And all of you who were pissed off because the Sox were standing pat had better re-think things, I guess.