PDA

View Full Version : Garcia to the LAAAinSCWCUSA?


Flight #24
11-17-2006, 07:03 AM
ST seems to think it's available.....http://www.suntimes.com/sports/deluca/139850,CST-SPT-deluca17.article

Among the more interesting scenarios is a pitch that sources say the Los Angeles Angels made for right-hander Freddy Garcia, whom they highly covet. The Angels' deal would call for a package that includes right-hander Ervin Santana, who turns 24 on Dec. 12.

Ummm.....a "package" including Santana for 1 year of Garcia? You run, don't walk to do that. That would lock up a very solid rotation of Contreras/Garland/Vazquez/Santana/McCarthy for '07 AND '08, give you 3 guys under contract for '09 and 2 beyond that. And it would give you the option to deal Contreras/Garland/Buehrle for a bat. Or to simply flip Santana for one.

And that's not factoring in whatever else is in the "package" from the Halos, who have a pretty good farm system.

CashMan
11-17-2006, 07:43 AM
ST seems to think it's available.....http://www.suntimes.com/sports/deluca/139850,CST-SPT-deluca17.article



Ummm.....a "package" including Santana for 1 year of Garcia? You run, don't walk to do that. That would lock up a very solid rotation of Contreras/Garland/Vazquez/Santana/McCarthy for '07 AND '08, give you 3 guys under contract for '09 and 2 beyond that. And it would give you the option to deal Contreras/Garland/Buehrle for a bat. Or to simply flip Santana for one.

And that's not factoring in whatever else is in the "package" from the Halos, who have a pretty good farm system.


They have a power hitting SS in their system, I wouldn't mind having!

Craig Grebeck
11-17-2006, 08:01 AM
That can't be true. I'd love it, but I will believe it when I see it.

Lillian
11-17-2006, 08:08 AM
I wonder if there isn't some kind of package being put together that includes Konerko, along with Garcia. The Angels have wanted Paulie for a couple of years now. I'd take Santana, Shields and a top prospect for them.

Who do the Angels have that could be that top prospect? Which position would we most want? I'd really love to see Gload get a shot at one season of being a full time player. The money we could free up by trading Konerko, could be used in lots of other ways. I really don't think we need the extra 15 to 20 homers that we would get from Konerko vs. Gload. Home runs are not this teams short coming.

Jurr
11-17-2006, 08:13 AM
I'm not sure what I think about this. If LAA is wanting to trade a 24 year old who's a solid pitcher with a ton of upside for a veteran that's lost a few MPH to his fastball, something's up. Shouldergate, anyone?

Jjav829
11-17-2006, 08:24 AM
If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Besides, it seems like De Luca is just offering that up as a suggestion, one which probably isn't very realistic. But the Angels certainly have some pretty good young players that I wouldn't mind seeing come here in a trade.

De Luca also reports that sources say KW has inquired into the possiblity of trading for Andruw Jones and, of course, Aaron Rowand.

Frater Perdurabo
11-17-2006, 09:07 AM
I wonder if there isn't some kind of package being put together that includes Konerko, along with Garcia. The Angels have wanted Paulie for a couple of years now. I'd take Santana, Shields and a top prospect for them.

Who do the Angels have that could be that top prospect? Which position would we most want? I'd really love to see Gload get a shot at one season of being a full time player. The money we could free up by trading Konerko, could be used in lots of other ways. I really don't think we need the extra 15 to 20 homers that we would get from Konerko vs. Gload. Home runs are not this teams short coming.

If PK were to be dealt, I'd want Greg Norton signed as a platoon partner for Gload. Norton also would be a decent RH pinch hitter.

infohawk
11-17-2006, 09:55 AM
I highly, highly doubt the Sox would trade PK. Besides breaking up a great middle of the order, it leaves a pretty significant hole to fill. This is especially true considering that the Sox only control Dye through 2007. He could be gone after this year. You wouldn't want to have to replace both Konerko and Dye.

CLR01
11-17-2006, 09:55 AM
Contreras/Garland/Vazquez/Santana/McCarthy for '07 AND '08, give you 3 guys under contract for '09 and 2 beyond that. And it would give you the option to deal Contreras/Garland/Buehrle for a bat. Or to simply flip Santana for one.

5 right handers in the same rotation while Buehrle hangs out in the bullpen? No thank you.

Buehrle>>>>Vazquez

If PK were to be dealt, I'd want Greg Norton signed as a platoon partner for Gload. Norton also would be a decent RH pinch hitter.


:puking:

Just say NO!

samram
11-17-2006, 10:03 AM
If PK were to be dealt, I'd want Greg Norton signed as a platoon partner for Gload. Norton also would be a decent RH pinch hitter.

If PK were dealt, another guy who could play 1B everyday would be signed or Thome would be put there and another hitter would be acquired, but I really don't think PK is going anywhere.

soxinem1
11-17-2006, 10:16 AM
If PK were to be dealt, I'd want Greg Norton signed as a platoon partner for Gload. Norton also would be a decent RH pinch hitter.

Downgrade all the way. And for Norton? Geez, he hit a couple homers for a cellar-dweller. He always had some power. But he K's too much and is no better than adequate at any position defensively.

If they trade Garcia, Vasquez, or Garcia, fine. But PK stays, in my book.

JermaineDye05
11-17-2006, 10:17 AM
I doubt this is true, it's too much in favor of the sox.

IF it did go down it would be great for the team, our rotation would get significantly younger. Plus with the pitchers we have left we could possibly make a package to go after Willis or Heilman (sp?).

lakeviewsoxfan
11-17-2006, 10:18 AM
The odds of Konerko being traded are about the same as me paying $5000 for a PS3.

JermaineDye05
11-17-2006, 10:20 AM
Downgrade all the way. And for Norton? Geez, he hit a couple homers for a cellar-dweller. He always had some power. But he K's too much and is no better than adequate at any position defensively.

If they trade Garcia, Vasquez, or Garcia, fine. But PK stays, in my book.


Garcia or Garcia? do we have another Garcia I'm unaware of? :?:

perhaps you meant Freddy Garcia and Freddy Guzman

spiffie
11-17-2006, 10:23 AM
Garcia for Santana
Buehrle/Crede for Alex Rodriguez

Lineup:
1 - Not Pods
2 - Iguchi
3 - Rodriguez
4 - Konerko
5 - Thome
6 - Dye
7 - Pierzynski
8 - Fields/other 3B
9 - Anderson

Rotation:
Garland/Contreras/Santana/McCarthy/Vazquez

This would actually free up money for us, and locks up two young possible stud pitchers for years to come. So I deeppink it.

TaylorStSox
11-17-2006, 10:27 AM
If PK were to be dealt, I'd want Greg Norton signed as a platoon partner for Gload. Norton also would be a decent RH pinch hitter.



A platoon of Norton and Gload? :redface: If that were to happen, I might just take a year off from baseball.

Huisj
11-17-2006, 10:29 AM
Downgrade all the way. And for Norton? Geez, he hit a couple homers for a cellar-dweller. He always had some power. But he K's too much and is no better than adequate at any position defensively.

If they trade Garcia, Vasquez, or Garcia, fine. But PK stays, in my book.

Not to mention Norton's a switch hitter who sucks batting right handed. His value (if he has any) is from the left side of the plate . . . the same side Gload hits from.

Pierzynski 12
11-17-2006, 10:40 AM
Angels can take Contreras instead of Freddy.:wink:

Flight #24
11-17-2006, 10:43 AM
5 right handers in the same rotation while Buehrle hangs out in the bullpen? No thank you.

Buehrle>>>>Vazquez

The assumption is that one of Vaz or MB would be dealt, and if not, it'd be a battle in ST to see if Buehrle's back or if Vazquez can maintain the improvement he showed in the 2d half. Loser goes to the 'pen.

Goose
11-17-2006, 11:15 AM
I thought PK had a no trade clause when he re-upped with the Sox. That is not to say he won't waive it, but iirc, he does which make things a bit more difficult.

Regardless...PK is here to stay.

103 screwball
11-17-2006, 11:43 AM
Reason Pauly will be with the Sox next year:

A. He's a fan favorite. Pauly! Pauly! Pauly!

B. He gave JR the ball from the final out of the World Series

C. He's the face of the franchise nationally

D. He gave a home town discount on his contract and if the Sox were to trade him, it would send the message to every Sox free agent not to give a home town discount because they will just trade you anyway. (Same reason you DO NOT trade Dye)

E. He's Good

F. ALL OF THE ABOVE

SABRSox
11-17-2006, 12:03 PM
I know that Bud Black is absolutely in love with Freddy Garcia, and I think the near perfect game in September sealed the deal. Stoneman's not a guy that likes to deal his prospects, but it was obvious that they needed a veteran pitcher that was going to stay healthy. Freddy matches that.

Santana would be fantastic, but I'd actually prefer to get one of either Brandon Wood, Erick Aybar, or Howie Kendrick. All 3 can play SS (Wood having the most power, Aybar and Kendrick the better OBP and speed). This is probably all speculation, but Stoneman can't sit around forever and do nothing. Moreno won't take another losing season kindly.

WhiteSoxFan84
11-17-2006, 12:09 PM
hahahaha, im still laughing at whoever said pk, garcia for ervin "magic" santana, scott shields, and someone else. maybe pk alone for all 3, maybe. garcia for all 3, in a heartbeat. but both? silly rabbit :smile:

palehozenychicty
11-17-2006, 12:16 PM
I know that Bud Black is absolutely in love with Freddy Garcia, and I think the near perfect game in September sealed the deal. Stoneman's not a guy that likes to deal his prospects, but it was obvious that they needed a veteran pitcher that was going to stay healthy. Freddy matches that.

Santana would be fantastic, but I'd actually prefer to get one of either Brandon Wood, Erick Aybar, or Howie Kendrick. All 3 can play SS (Wood having the most power, Aybar and Kendrick the better OBP and speed). This is probably all speculation, but Stoneman can't sit around forever and do nothing. Moreno won't take another losing season kindly.

Black is managing the Padres now, so he'll have nothing to do with selling Stoneman on Garcia. Unless it's an Angels-Padres trade. :redneck

SABRSox
11-17-2006, 12:27 PM
Black is managing the Padres now, so he'll have nothing to do with selling Stoneman on Garcia. Unless it's an Angels-Padres trade. :redneck

Ha, forgot about that. Nobody pays attention to the Padres anyway. :redface:

Lillian
11-17-2006, 01:13 PM
hahahaha, im still laughing at whoever said pk, garcia for ervin "magic" santana, scott shields, and someone else. maybe pk alone for all 3, maybe. garcia for all 3, in a heartbeat. but both? silly rabbit :smile:

It's interesting that you find the suggestion laughable. Here's my logic:
This current Sox team has too many expensive, and questionable starters, and is still short one more arm for the pen. We have 6 starters, all of whom have expensive contracts, except Brandon McCarthy. How confident are you in the guys we have? I am very worried about the kind of performance we can expect, after that underachieving pitching we just witnessed.

Getting E. Santana to replace Freddy, gives us a young, relatively inexpensive, quality starter. If K.W. feels confident that he can still think of going with five starters, and count on them all being healthy and performing up to 2005 levels, fine, then trade one of the other remaining guys for whatever helps us the most.

Shields gives you the final piece of the bullpen puzzle.

Konerko has too big of a contract, and I'd prefer to spend that money on a different free agent. Maybe they could pursue V. Wells, if they didn't have the Garcia and Konerko contracts. Gload would be an upgrade on defense, inexpensive, and a good solid left handed bat. The only thing that he doesn't give you is big power numbers for a first baseman. But then this team doesn't want for power.

As far as the prospect goes, that's the wild card that could make such a move really attractive. The Angels have some very good SS prospects, and that is a position I'd like to see the Sox shore up. I've always loved Uribe's potential, ever since I watched him in Tucson during the entire 2004 Spring training exhibition season, but I'm really getting impatient with his lack of plate discipline.

Well, that is a little more detail about what you regard as "laughable". I guess that we're all entitled to our opinions.

Sargeant79
11-17-2006, 01:42 PM
There is no way the Angels make this deal. We'd have to give up more than Freddy Garcia to get Ervin Santana.

munchman33
11-17-2006, 01:54 PM
C. He's the face of the franchise nationally


That's not even close to being true. Ozzie is by far the face of the franchise.

NardiWasHere
11-17-2006, 02:05 PM
There is no way the Angels make this deal. We'd have to give up more than Freddy Garcia to get Ervin Santana.

Exactly... Why would the Angels give up a young, fairly cheap SP for an expensive, older one when they need a bat?

Don't get it.

maurice
11-17-2006, 02:08 PM
A. He's a fan favorite. Pauly! Pauly! Pauly!

The Sox under JR obviously don't have a problem dumping fan favorites (Har-old! O-E-O Magglio! Crash, etc.).
B. He gave JR the ball from the final out of the World Series

That would be a really dumb reason to make a personnel decision.C. He's the face of the franchise nationally

:?: Ozzie and AJ get WAY more national coverage than Konerko.
D. He gave a home town discount on his contract
No, he didn't. In fact, he inisisted that the Sox increase their offer or he'd sign with the Angels. The only team to offer more was the O's, and he didn't want to go to that crappy team.
E. He's Good
He's also an extremely highly paid #5 hitter with a long contract, so that's a wash (at best).

The real reason he won't be traded is because he has a no-trade clause and probably doesn't want to be traded. However, if there's one trade he would accept, it would be a trade to the Angels, the only other team he seriously considered when he was a FA.

whitesoxfan
11-17-2006, 02:11 PM
Garcia for Santana? Where the hell do I sign? If that is actually true, that would be an amazing deal for us. I really believe Santana is going to be a stud in this league.

crazyozzie02
11-17-2006, 02:15 PM
i dont get why everyone is so gun-hoe about trading paulie. what bad has he done to us in the past three-four years?

oeo
11-17-2006, 02:17 PM
I wonder if there isn't some kind of package being put together that includes Konerko, along with Garcia. The Angels have wanted Paulie for a couple of years now. I'd take Santana, Shields and a top prospect for them.

Who do the Angels have that could be that top prospect? Which position would we most want? I'd really love to see Gload get a shot at one season of being a full time player. The money we could free up by trading Konerko, could be used in lots of other ways. I really don't think we need the extra 15 to 20 homers that we would get from Konerko vs. Gload. Home runs are not this teams short coming.

Uh...why is PK so underrated around here? He just finished a very good season (quietly), and his trade value is that low that he's going to be put into a package for Santana and Shields? If we're trading Freddy AND Konerko, we better be getting more than Santana, Shields, and a top prospect.

Paulie wasn't signed to get traded the next year. This is ridiculous that some of you will send him out of here.

103 screwball
11-17-2006, 02:20 PM
That's not even close to being true. Ozzie is by far the face of the franchise.

Maybe so, but Pauly is the most recognizable player. If you create a White Sox "family" like team where players want to stay with the team so much that they take millions of dollars less to stay with the team, the worst thing you could do is trade that player. Pauly took less money to stay with the Sox, not to be a better trade bait. Maybe I'm the only one that feels this way. Even if KW got a great deal for Pauly, it would be bad for business in the long run.

Garcia + prospect for Santana and Figgins would be great. If that happened, the Sox would still have 6 good starters and could trade another to the Rangers or Mets or or or.... so many possibilities. Oh and will have reduced salary in the process. Go KW!

Rocky Soprano
11-17-2006, 02:32 PM
Even if KW got a great deal for Pauly, it would be bad for business in the long run.


Sorry but that's just dumb.
How can you not pull a trade if its a GREAT deal like you said.

Frank Thomas used to be the face of the team and what happened?

Sox Fan 35
11-17-2006, 02:34 PM
Maybe so, but Pauly is the most recognizable player. If you create a White Sox "family" like team where players want to stay with the team so much that they take millions of dollars less to stay with the team, the worst thing you could do is trade that player. Pauly took less money to stay with the Sox, not to be a better trade bait. Maybe I'm the only one that feels this way. Even if KW got a great deal for Pauly, it would be bad for business in the long run.


I agree. It would be bad to trade him after that.

I am all for that trade. It almost sounds to good to be true.

Frater Perdurabo
11-17-2006, 02:37 PM
Not to mention Norton's a switch hitter who sucks batting right handed. His value (if he has any) is from the left side of the plate . . . the same side Gload hits from.

OK, fair enough. Icsnay on OrtonNay. :redface:

Still, IF they were to deal Konerko (and I KNOW that it is extremely unlikely given the reasons others have listed), it would free up cash to go after A-Rod or Wells, each of whom would produce similar offensive numbers but with better speed at a more important defensive position. In such a situation, with stellar offense coming either from CF or SS, offensively the Sox could "afford" to go with a Gload-RHB platoon at 1B.

spiffie
11-17-2006, 03:23 PM
OK, fair enough. Icsnay on OrtonNay. :redface:

Still, IF they were to deal Konerko (and I KNOW that it is extremely unlikely given the reasons others have listed), it would free up cash to go after A-Rod or Wells, each of whom would produce similar offensive numbers but with better speed at a more important defensive position. In such a situation, with stellar offense coming either from CF or SS, offensively the Sox could "afford" to go with a Gload-RHB platoon at 1B.
You beat me to that point :wink: . I would not want to trade Konerko just to get his cash off the books, or just to get some good young talent. But if the cash would be going out to get someone who would be even better than Paulie, then I'm interested.

Konerko/Garcia for Santana/Shields/Aybar
McCarthy/Sweeney/prospect for Wells. Sign Wells to a 3/42 deal.

Salaries going out - 23 million
salaries coming in - 17 million
Spend 6 million on new leadoff hitter

sullythered
11-17-2006, 03:24 PM
OK, fair enough. Icsnay on OrtonNay. :redface:

Still, IF they were to deal Konerko (and I KNOW that it is extremely unlikely given the reasons others have listed), it would free up cash to go after A-Rod or Wells, each of whom would produce similar offensive numbers but with better speed at a more important defensive position. In such a situation, with stellar offense coming either from CF or SS, offensively the Sox could "afford" to go with a Gload-RHB platoon at 1B.

I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but I wouldn't trade Paulie straight up for either A-Rod or Wells. I know, I know, first basemen are easier to come by than all-world blah blah blah. All I know is, I watched a lot of Sox players on a lot of "good" Sox teams choke big time on the big stage. Paulie comes up HUGE in the same situations. I know the stat-heads will call me stupid, but ARod blows in big situations. He just does.

Ozzie might be the face of the Sox, but Paul Konerko is almost as important, if not just as.

soxinem1
11-17-2006, 03:32 PM
Garcia or Garcia? do we have another Garcia I'm unaware of? :?:

perhaps you meant Freddy Garcia and Freddy Guzman

My goof, I meant Contreras instead of the second Garcia.

spiffie
11-17-2006, 03:46 PM
I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but I wouldn't trade Paulie straight up for either A-Rod or Wells. I know, I know, first basemen are easier to come by than all-world blah blah blah. All I know is, I watched a lot of Sox players on a lot of "good" Sox teams choke big time on the big stage. Paulie comes up HUGE in the same situations. I know the stat-heads will call me stupid, but ARod blows in big situations. He just does.

Paul Konerko postseason numbers: 224/274/517/791
Alex Rodriguez postseason numbers: 280/362/485/847

thomas35forever
11-17-2006, 03:49 PM
I'd like Garcia-for-Santana. Freddy pitches well in L.A. and I'd love to have Johan's bro. I wouldn't give up anyone else though.

1917
11-17-2006, 03:56 PM
I'd like Garcia-for-Santana. Freddy pitches well in L.A. and I'd love to have Johan's bro. I wouldn't give up anyone else though.

He's not his bro...one is from DR, one is from Ven.

sullythered
11-17-2006, 04:05 PM
Paul Konerko postseason numbers: 224/274/517/791
Alex Rodriguez postseason numbers: 280/362/485/847

And numbers lie. Paulie's PLAYOFF #'s are limited to two seasons. He was 0 for 9 in 2000 before he had really developed as a player. He had three HUGE home runs in the 2005 playoffs, and has come up big a bunch of times in the regular season, of late.

ARod has choked when the game was on the line more often than he has come through. I said, he puts up all-world numbers. Plus, he's kind of a jag. I still don't want him.

The Immigrant
11-17-2006, 04:07 PM
Paul Konerko postseason numbers: 224/274/517/791
Alex Rodriguez postseason numbers: 280/362/485/847

Not saying I'd take Konerko over Rodriguez, but those numbers are completely meaningless.

Konerko was a beast in the 2005 playoffs (5 HR, 13 H, 15 RBI) but went 0 for 9 in 2000. Some sample size...

mjmcend
11-17-2006, 04:14 PM
And numbers lie. Paulie's PLAYOFF #'s are limited to two seasons. He was 0 for 9 in 2000 before he had really developed as a player. He had three HUGE home runs in the 2005 playoffs, and has come up big a bunch of times in the regular season, of late.

ARod has choked when the game was on the line more often than he has come through. I said, he puts up all-world numbers. Plus, he's kind of a jag. I still don't want him.

And Paulie eats more dirt too, right?

maurice
11-17-2006, 04:14 PM
He had three HUGE home runs in the 2005 playoffs....

Really? I'm not doubting you, but the only one that stands out was the big one against the Angels. What were the other 2? I mean, Pods and Blum had big post-season HRs too. That's doesn't mean I'd rather pay them 4 years / $48 mil. and forgo Vernon Wells.

sullythered
11-17-2006, 04:17 PM
Really? I'm not doubting you, but the only one that stands out was the big one against the Angels. What were the other 2? I mean, Pods and Blum had big post-season HRs too. That's doesn't mean I'd rather pay them 4 years / $48 mil. and forgo Vernon Wells.

He hit home runs in consecutive games against the Angels, and if you don't think his Grande Slam in the freakin' World Series was huge, I have nothing more to say to you.

ilsox7
11-17-2006, 04:18 PM
Really? I'm not doubting you, but the only one that stands out was the big one against the Angels. What were the other 2?

He hit 2 1st inning HR's in Anaheim and then the Slam in the World Series.

jdm2662
11-17-2006, 04:32 PM
Really? I'm not doubting you, but the only one that stands out was the big one against the Angels. What were the other 2? I mean, Pods and Blum had big post-season HRs too. That's doesn't mean I'd rather pay them 4 years / $48 mil. and forgo Vernon Wells.

:?:

He had TWO against the Angels, both first inning HRs that also happened to be the game winners. Both HRs gave the Sox an early edge and sucked the wind out of a team already struggling to hit. He also won the MVP of the series (although you could debate Crede deserved it).

He had one in game three of a tied game in the ALDS. Pretty big since it was the go ahead runs in a tight game.

Oh yeah, the WS grand slam was pretty huge, too.

spiffie
11-17-2006, 04:34 PM
And numbers lie. Paulie's PLAYOFF #'s are limited to two seasons. He was 0 for 9 in 2000 before he had really developed as a player. He had three HUGE home runs in the 2005 playoffs, and has come up big a bunch of times in the regular season, of late.

ARod has choked when the game was on the line more often than he has come through. I said, he puts up all-world numbers. Plus, he's kind of a jag. I still don't want him.
No, numbers don't lie, perception lies. Because the media has told us that Rodriguez is a choker, and because he has had 2 crappy ALDS runs the last 2 years (a 9 game sample), that somehow equates to him being ****ty in the clutch. Did he forget how to be clutch after his years in Seattle when he posted a nearly 1.200 OPS in the 2000 ALCS? Or was if after the 2004 ALDS when he went 421/476/737? And because Konerko had the good fortune to get on a awesome hot streak where he hit some damn timely home runs, that makes him a better player to have around? Did Crede forget how to play well when we needed him between the 2005 postseason and Sept. 2006, or is he forgiven his .179 batting average? Did our stud pitchers all forget how to be clutch when they lost 7 out of 8 between Sept. 15-22, basically ending our playoff hopes? Paul Konerko is a great player. He'd be a great player regardless of if his ball off Qualls had fallen 2 ft short of the wall in Game 2 of the World Series or not. And because Alex Rodiguez had 9 bad games, doesn't mean he's still not one of the 2-3 best hitters in the game, and salary not considered, a massive benefit to any team he's on.

sullythered
11-17-2006, 04:43 PM
No, numbers don't lie, perception lies. Because the media has told us that Rodriguez is a choker, and because he has had 2 crappy ALDS runs the last 2 years (a 9 game sample), that somehow equates to him being ****ty in the clutch. Did he forget how to be clutch after his years in Seattle when he posted a nearly 1.200 OPS in the 2000 ALCS? Or was if after the 2004 ALDS when he went 421/476/737? And because Konerko had the good fortune to get on a awesome hot streak where he hit some damn timely home runs, that makes him a better player to have around? Did Crede forget how to play well when we needed him between the 2005 postseason and Sept. 2006, or is he forgiven his .179 batting average? Did our stud pitchers all forget how to be clutch when they lost 7 out of 8 between Sept. 15-22, basically ending our playoff hopes? Paul Konerko is a great player. He'd be a great player regardless of if his ball off Qualls had fallen 2 ft short of the wall in Game 2 of the World Series or not. And because Alex Rodiguez had 9 bad games, doesn't mean he's still not one of the 2-3 best hitters in the game, and salary not considered, a massive benefit to any team he's on.
Perception comes into play when you're talking numbers, too. Of course numbers lie. Particularly offensive numbers. Otherwise the Sox would have won more games with the mammoth offensive numbers they posted this past season. I also subscribe to the team chemistry thing. I know it's very "Hawk" of me, but whatever. In my estimation, Paul Konerko brings more to this particular Sox team than A-Rod would. We don't need more gawdy offensive numbers, especially at the cost of team leadership. Plus Rodriguez is a downgrade at third, and not much better (when Uribe plays his best) at shortstop.

If we were playing fantasy baseball, sure, ARod is way better. But we're not. A team with maybe the sixth or seventh best numbers in baseball just won the World Series. If numbers didn't lie, that would be downright impossible.

maurice
11-17-2006, 04:57 PM
I was referring to the slam and got the series mixed up.

If 1st inning HR are considered "HUGE," then Frank Thomas is the most clutch player in the history of baseball.

sullythered
11-17-2006, 05:05 PM
I was referring to the slam and got the series mixed up.

If 1st inning HR are considered "HUGE," then Frank Thomas is the most clutch player in the history of baseball.

Both were game winners that changed the complexion of the game and set the tone for the series. I was only 13 in '93 so I can't remember Frank's only Sox playoff homer, but if you say it was in the first inning, I believe you. Either way, hardly a comparison.

nodiggity59
11-17-2006, 05:09 PM
No, numbers don't lie

:roflmao:

Jaffar
11-17-2006, 05:11 PM
I also subscribe to the team chemistry thing. I know it's very "Hawk" of me, but whatever. In my estimation, Paul Konerko brings more to this particular Sox team than A-Rod would. We don't need more gawdy offensive numbers, especially at the cost of team leadership. Plus Rodriguez is a downgrade at third, and not much better (when Uribe plays his best) at shortstop.

Wasn't Arod the best Shortstop in baseball when the Yankees traded for him? Didn't he also move to third because it was best for the team?
If I recall correctly the last 2 years he played shortstop he won the GG, was the HR Champion, RBI leader in one and MVP in the other.

PalehosePlanet
11-17-2006, 05:12 PM
Why is it that anytime the Angels are involved in trade talks Ervin Santana is always the bait?

I'm starting to think he's a head-case.

sullythered
11-17-2006, 05:17 PM
Wasn't Arod the best Shortstop in baseball when the Yankees traded for him? Didn't he also move to third because it was best for the team?
If I recall correctly the last 2 years he played shortstop he won the GG, was the HR Champion, RBI leader in one and MVP in the other.
ARod was a very good SS. I just think Juan is too. Gold Gloves are rarely (to me) a direct indicator of the "best" player at his position. He moved to third (where he is only OK) because the Yankees have Derek Jeter, another guy I like better than Rodriguez.

The Yankees have proven over the last several years, getting the biggest names with the biggest numbers does not win you a World Series. Putting together a team that meshes and plays baseball the right way does.

spiffie
11-17-2006, 05:17 PM
Perception comes into play when you're talking numbers, too. Of course numbers lie. Particularly offensive numbers. Otherwise the Sox would have won more games with the mammoth offensive numbers they posted this past season. I also subscribe to the team chemistry thing. I know it's very "Hawk" of me, but whatever. In my estimation, Paul Konerko brings more to this particular Sox team than A-Rod would. We don't need more gawdy offensive numbers, especially at the cost of team leadership. Plus Rodriguez is a downgrade at third, and not much better (when Uribe plays his best) at shortstop.

If we were playing fantasy baseball, sure, ARod is way better. But we're not. A team with maybe the sixth or seventh best numbers in baseball just won the World Series. If numbers didn't lie, that would be downright impossible.
A few things:

- All the mammoth offense in the world isn't going to help you when your pitching craps the bed. The Yankees learn this year after year. During the loss stretch I mentioned earlier, the Sox had losses where they scored 4, 5, 6, and 6 runs. With better pitching all of those could have been wins. Of course, more offense might have helped us in the 3 times we got shut out in September, or in the 11 games that months where we scored 2 runs or less.

- So Paulie "brings things" to the team. Okay, fair enough. I'm sure there is a certain element of leadership that one has and that can have an effect. So where was that leadership or those game-changing intangibles in 2006? Or 2004? Or 2003? How come these things are only brought up when the team wins? Did Paulie forget how to be a leader and clubhouse influence last year when the team seemed dead in the water? Or did he try to bring it and fail? If you're going to try and apply intanigbles that have absolutely no way to be measured, I think you have to look for them in losses as well as wins.

-Rodriguez is a slightly better defensive SS than Uribe, and the change offensively would be akin to me replacing Peter Dinklage in a "Who's Taller?" contest.

Daver
11-17-2006, 05:20 PM
ARod was a very good SS. I just think Juan is too. Gold Gloves are rarely (to me) a direct indicator of the "best" player at his position. He moved to third (where he is only OK) because the Yankees have Derek Jeter, another guy I like better than Rodriguez.

The Yankees have proven over the last several years, getting the biggest names with the biggest numbers does not win you a World Series. Putting together a team that meshes and plays baseball the right way does.

:?:

Juan Uribe is in now way,shape, or form comparable to Alex Rodriguez at SS, to do so is laughable to say the least. The best SS in all of baseball plays third base for the Yankees.

sullythered
11-17-2006, 05:25 PM
A few things:

- All the mammoth offense in the world isn't going to help you when your pitching craps the bed. The Yankees learn this year after year. During the loss stretch I mentioned earlier, the Sox had losses where they scored 4, 5, 6, and 6 runs. With better pitching all of those could have been wins. Of course, more offense might have helped us in the 3 times we got shut out in September, or in the 11 games that months where we scored 2 runs or less.

- So Paulie "brings things" to the team. Okay, fair enough. I'm sure there is a certain element of leadership that one has and that can have an effect. So where was that leadership or those game-changing intangibles in 2006? Or 2004? Or 2003? How come these things are only brought up when the team wins? Did Paulie forget how to be a leader and clubhouse influence last year when the team seemed dead in the water? Or did he try to bring it and fail? If you're going to try and apply intanigbles that have absolutely no way to be measured, I think you have to look for them in losses as well as wins.

-Rodriguez is a slightly better defensive SS than Uribe, and the change offensively would be akin to me replacing Peter Dinklage in a "Who's Taller?" contest.

1. Funny last line. :D:

2. Having a team leader doesn't assure you a world championship, but I think it helps. The intangibles I talked about weren't solely brought to my attention by wins and losses. It's partially the way the team, the coaching staff, and even the fans think of the guy. We came up short in '03 '04 and '06. But I don't think we would have won it all with ARod instead of Pauly in those years, either. And I don't think we would have won it with ARod instead of Pauly and Uribe in '05.

3. I agree that Rodriguez is slightly better def. than Uribe, and there is no comparison offensively. But I never said I wouldn't take ARod for Juan player for player. :smile:

sullythered
11-17-2006, 05:29 PM
:?:

Juan Uribe is in now way,shape, or form comparable to Alex Rodriguez at SS, to do so is laughable to say the least. The best SS in all of baseball plays third base for the Yankees.

Confused smiley me all you want, Daver, I think the guy was over-rated defensively. And, hey, I didn't watch all his games, but I saw quite a few, and I didn't get any Ozzie Smith vibes.

Daver
11-17-2006, 05:37 PM
Confused smiley me all you want, Daver, I think the guy was over-rated defensively. And, hey, I didn't watch all his games, but I saw quite a few, and I didn't get any Ozzie Smith vibes.

How can you be over rated when all you do is make every play on the balls hit to you? He led the league in total chances more than once. All great defensive players don't get much credit for it, because they make it look easy, as opposed to mediocre defensive players who make a production out of a difficult catch.

CLR01
11-17-2006, 05:43 PM
:?:

He had TWO against the Angels, both first inning HRs that also happened to be the game winners.

:?:


Two first inning HR's were game winners? Did we watch the same series?

mjmcend
11-17-2006, 05:48 PM
ARod was a very good SS. I just think Juan is too. Gold Gloves are rarely (to me) a direct indicator of the "best" player at his position. He moved to third (where he is only OK) because the Yankees have Derek Jeter, another guy I like better than Rodriguez.

The Yankees have proven over the last several years, getting the biggest names with the biggest numbers does not win you a World Series. Putting together a team that meshes and plays baseball the right way does.

No what the Yankees have proven is that old, oft-injured, or just plain crappy pitchers are not the way to win the world series.

sullythered
11-17-2006, 05:51 PM
How can you be over rated when all you do is make every play on the balls hit to you? He led the league in total chances more than once. All great defensive players don't get much credit for it, because they make it look easy, as opposed to mediocre defensive players who make a production out of a difficult catch.

I agree with you to a point, as with the BA/Rowand argument. But I think just because you don't ever really make spectacular-looking play, it doesn't always mean that you just make everything look easy.

I really don't think ARod is as bad as New York thinks he is. I just don't think he's as great as everybody else does. My initial point was that I wouldn't give up Paulie for him, and I honestly doubt anybody's gonna argue me out of that. Closed-minded, or not.

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-17-2006, 05:51 PM
About Garcia: I don't think this trade is all that crazy whatsoever. Think about it. Freddy Garcia is 8-1 with an era of 2.99 in Angels Stadium. That's like 1.4 inherited runs less a game!

And how fun would it be for the sox's Santana to duke it out with the Twins's Santana? Shweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet!:bandance:

sullythered
11-17-2006, 05:54 PM
No what the Yankees have proven is that old, oft-injured, or just plain crappy pitchers are not the way to win the world series.
You know what, you guys are all right. So if the argument is to move our team leader for Johan Santana, I'll listen.

jdm2662
11-17-2006, 06:00 PM
:?:


Two first inning HR's were game winners? Did we watch the same series?

I hope so. The Sox won 5-2 in game 3. His homer in game 3 put them up 3-0, hence the game winning RBI. In game 4, the Sox won 8-2. The home run put them up 3-0, and once again, the go ahead run. Maybe they weren't game winners by your logic, but they were technically were the game winning RBIs. Both homers also gave the Sox an early lead, and took the life out of already struggling hitting team.

His ALDS HR was the go ahead RBI as well.

Daver
11-17-2006, 06:12 PM
I agree with you to a point, as with the BA/Rowand argument. But I think just because you don't ever really make spectacular-looking play, it doesn't always mean that you just make everything look easy.

I really don't think ARod is as bad as New York thinks he is. I just don't think he's as great as everybody else does. My initial point was that I wouldn't give up Paulie for him, and I honestly doubt anybody's gonna argue me out of that. Closed-minded, or not.

My point was not a Konerko for Rodriguez trade, I would not make that deal either, it was to point out that comparing Juan Uribe to Alex Rodriguez is ludicrous, I have seen all of Ozzie Smith's career, and had Alex remained a SS, he would surpass him.

sullythered
11-17-2006, 06:22 PM
My point was not a Konerko for Rodriguez trade, I would not make that deal either, it was to point out that comparing Juan Uribe to Alex Rodriguez is ludicrous, I have seen all of Ozzie Smith's career, and had Alex remained a SS, he would surpass him.

Well you've got me on the years and experience watching baseball, I just never saw the overwhelming greatness on D from Rodriguez. Also, I think Juan is one of the best there is, when he's on top of his game.

And the whole argument is predicated on the Paul for Alex deal that I hate.

CLR01
11-17-2006, 06:26 PM
I hope so. The Sox won 5-2 in game 3. His homer in game 3 put them up 3-0, hence the game winning RBI. In game 4, the Sox won 8-2. The home run put them up 3-0, and once again, the go ahead run. Maybe they weren't game winners by your logic, but they were technically were the game winning RBIs. Both homers also gave the Sox an early lead, and took the life out of already struggling hitting team.

His ALDS HR was the go ahead RBI as well.

His ALCS game 3 HR was only two runs, the Sox went on to score three more runs and win 5-2. Game 4 I don't know I have a hard time calling a first inning hr a "game winning HR" when the team scores 5 more runs after that. Even if the HR did give them all the runs they would need.

He hit two in the ALDS. The game 1 was not but the game 3 most definitely was.

jdm2662
11-17-2006, 06:35 PM
His ALCS game 3 HR was only two runs, the Sox went on to score three more runs and win 5-2. Game 4 I don't know I have a hard time calling a first inning hr a "game winning HR" when the team scores 5 more runs after that. Even if the HR did give them all the runs they would need.

He hit two in the ALDS. The game 1 was not but the game 3 most definitely was.

Yes, I know the game 3 ALCS was two runs. The score was 1-0 when he hit it making it 3-0. You certainly have a point about the first inning. Maybe it should be noted that his HRs gave the Sox the lead, and if they scored no more runs, they still win. Ok, enough of that. I'm confusing myself. Bottom line, he technically had the game winning RBI in those two games.

I forgot about his game 1 HR in the ALDS. A solo homer in the middle of 14 runs scored can sometimes go unnoticed. I was referring to the game 3 HR as you already pointed out.

PKalltheway
11-17-2006, 06:55 PM
I highly, highly doubt the Sox would trade PK. Besides breaking up a great middle of the order, it leaves a pretty significant hole to fill. This is especially true considering that the Sox only control Dye through 2007. He could be gone after this year. You wouldn't want to have to replace both Konerko and Dye.
I agree. Trading PK would be a very bad move. You would lose a solid power hitter, you don't know if Jermaine Dye will stay after next season, and Thome's not getting any younger.

Jjav829
11-17-2006, 06:59 PM
This thread went from an unrealistic trade scenario of Garcia-for-Santana to an unrealistic trade scenario of PK being traded. :?:

At least the Aaron Rowand rumors have some chance of actually coming to fruition.

jdm2662
11-17-2006, 07:03 PM
This thread went from an unrealistic trade scenario of Garcia-for-Santana to an unrealistic trade scenario of PK being traded. :?:

At least the Aaron Rowand rumors have some chance of actually coming to fruition.

Hey Jjav829,

My father's brother's nephew's cousin heard the Sox are going after Aaron Rowand. Do you know anything? :D:

Jjav829
11-17-2006, 07:09 PM
Hey Jjav829,

My father's brother's nephew's cousin heard the Sox are going after Aaron Rowand. Do you know anything? :D:

Aaron's wife told me today that Rowand won't be at the Cardinals ring ceremony next year.

She also said they're looking for houses in the Chicago area...but not because of the Sox. Apparently Rowand's going to sign to play DB for the Bears. :bandance:

Lillian
11-17-2006, 07:25 PM
This thread went from an unrealistic trade scenario of Garcia-for-Santana to an unrealistic trade scenario of PK being traded. :?:

At least the Aaron Rowand rumors have some chance of actually coming to fruition.

Sorry, if I seemed to have hijacked this thread by interjecting the Konerko factor. However, let's be realistic. There is no way that the Angels would trade Santana for Garcia straight up. The original rumor suggested that "it would be part of a package", although it didn't elaborate. I just know that the Angels have been very interested in Paulie, and that LA is probably the only place that he would agree to go. All of that, coupled with my personal feeling that the Sox need to upgrade the pitching, and that they could probably better spend $14 million a year, for the next four years, on a better all around player than Konerko.

lakeviewsoxfan
11-17-2006, 09:36 PM
Sorry, if I seemed to have hijacked this thread by interjecting the Konerko factor. However, let's be realistic. There is no way that the Angels would trade Santana for Garcia straight up. The original rumor suggested that "it would be part of a package", although it didn't elaborate. I just know that the Angels have been very interested in Paulie, and that LA is probably the only place that he would agree to go. All of that, coupled with my personal feeling that the Sox need to upgrade the pitching, and that they could probably better spend $14 million a year, for the next four years, on a better all around player than Konerko.

This thread sucks. And Konerko is due to make $12MM a year for the next 4 years not 14MM

munchman33
11-17-2006, 11:04 PM
What if the deal was Santana/Figgins/Shields for Garcia/Crede?

What does everyone think about that?

JermaineDye05
11-17-2006, 11:38 PM
What if the deal was Santana/Figgins/Shields for Garcia/Crede?

What does everyone think about that?


still too good to be true, no way the angels give up Shields he is the key to that bullpen

Lillian
11-17-2006, 11:41 PM
This thread sucks. And Konerko is due to make $12MM a year for the next 4 years not 14MM

Sorry, my "bad". I forgot that it was $60 million for five years. Thanks for reminding me. And so how would you complete this rumored trade involving Garcia, and Santana?

Ol' No. 2
11-18-2006, 12:55 AM
Sorry, my "bad". I forgot that it was $60 million for five years. Thanks for reminding me. And so how would you complete this rumored trade involving Garcia, and Santana?I wouldn't. If the Sox are trying to open a spot in the rotation for McCarthy, what's the point in trading one starter for another?:?:

Flight #24
11-18-2006, 01:06 AM
I wouldn't. If the Sox are trying to open a spot in the rotation for McCarthy, what's the point in trading one starter for another?:?:

Assuming KW likes Santana, he's younger and cheaper than 4 of the other guys, and under control a lot longer. It would set up another starter trade, but keep in line with KW locking up pitching long term. Or it might free up McCarthy for the ever-present Crawford deal. Or even for ARod(as part of a package, obviously).

TheOldRoman
11-18-2006, 01:11 AM
I wouldn't. If the Sox are trying to open a spot in the rotation for McCarthy, what's the point in trading one starter for another?:?:
Well, let me say first that I think this trade is way too good to be true, so therefore, it is all BS.

This trade would work on so many levels. We could keep Santana and McCarthy in our rotation for cheap the next four years. Then we could spin one of our other starters for top prospects. KW could then either keep the prospects or trade them to fill holes at SS and leadoff. That would make our rotation nasty for the next four years, but on the other hand, we would have to trust two kids with nothing but potential to make 30 starts apiece this year.

Or, we could keep the other four starters from last year and package McCarthy -or- Santana to the Rays for Carl Crawford. If we got Santana, I think KW would move another starter in a big trade.

buehrle4cy05
11-18-2006, 01:23 AM
Well, let me say first that I think this trade is way too good to be true, so therefore, it is all BS.


I agree. I'm not about to get excited about something that, considering the deal, won't happen unless Stoneman took a sledgehammer to his head.

MrX
11-18-2006, 02:10 AM
There's a new story on the Cubune website where KW says the Garcia for Santana deal is BS.

Lillian
11-18-2006, 08:13 AM
There's a new story on the Cubune website where KW says the Garcia for Santana deal is BS.

What the article specifically quotes Williams as saying is; "It's sad to me that fans are being misled". He goes on; "I will say for the record it's absolutely untrue, and I'll answer that question because there has been so much speculated that is completely off-base. I don't want our fans fooled."

My reaction is to wonder why he felt a need to address this particular rumor at all, if it's just another baseless rumor. There have been plenty of other deals about which many have speculated, and he never dispelled those. No, I think it may be an instance of "The lady (the G.M.) doth protest too much, methinks".

As many of us have said, the reported deal is too good to be true for the Sox. K.W. clearly states that he doesn't want Sox fans to be "misled", and "fooled". Could such a statement be intended to avoid disappointment when fans discover the details of the deal, and learn that it's not as attractive as the rumor suggests?

This one just has too many pieces that fit, to dismiss it all together. The Sox are shopping Garcia, whom the Angels covet. The Angels need some veteran pitching, to go along with a young staff. They have the lead off guy whom we covet, as Ozzie loves Figgins. They have the bullpen surplus. They also have been shopping Santana, and Williams wants young starting pitching.
I'm sorry, but I still think that Konerko is in their discussions. I've already stated my reasons for such speculation, but the most compelling element is that the Angels covet him perhaps more than any of our players, and L.A. is the one team for which Konerko would probably agree to wave his no trade clause.
This latest comment by Williams only heightens my curiosity. If Paulie were to be included in this deal, it's easy to see how Kenny would want to try to soften the blow to Sox fans, when they discover that their fan favorite was being dealt.

Lillian
11-18-2006, 08:26 AM
Oh yes, I forgot. So just for the Hell of it, here's my fantasy trade:
Santana, Shields and Figgins for
Garcia and Konerko.

I'd be happy to discuss the merits, if anyone wants to go beyond stating that I'm just an idiot. However, I will add that part of this scenario allows the Sox the flexibility of then trading one of the other starters for the center fielder, whom some think we need. It also frees up the money to go after an impact guy like Vernon Wells, Carl Crawford, or Andruw Jones. Or we could trade that starter, and Uribe for Michael Young, if that is the direction we need to go.
These kinds of moves would give the Sox what they have stated that they want; more speed, younger and less expensive starting pitching, and one more bullpen arm, and all without degrading the defense.

God, I do love baseball!!! Isn't this fun?

Lillian
11-18-2006, 08:51 AM
You know the more I think about this, the more I like it. Wouldn't it be great if we could actually get this all done? I love this construct:

Starters:
Garland
Contreras
Buerhle
Santana
McCarthy

Bullpen:
Shields
Aardsma
Logan
MacDougal
Thornton
Jenks

Lineup:
Figgins LF
Iguchi 2nd
Dye RF
Thome DH
Wells CF or Crawford
Crede 3rd
Gload 1st
Uribe SS
A.J. C

gone: Garcia, Vasquez, Konerko, Anderson
younger, faster, cheaper

The question is: Is it doable? None of these personnel moves are baseless. The players and teams mentioned all involve players who are being shopped, or rumored to be in play, with the exception of Konerko.
If K.W. can net those players for Konerko, Anderson, and two or our starters, he is indeed very good. That's just my two cents worth.
I know I got a little carried away this morning. I'll stop now. Thanks for indulging me, and please be nice.:D:

mrwag
11-18-2006, 09:50 AM
Man, I just don't know. This team without Paulie isn't the same. He's the kinda guy you wanna see stay with the team and retire in a Sox uniform. I know, I'm in a fantasy land. I never thought I'd see Frank in a non-Sox uniform either.

samram
11-18-2006, 09:52 AM
Here's (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-061117sox,1,6082485.story?coll=cs-home-headlines) KW take on the Garcia for Santana trade:

"It's sad to me that fans are being misled," Williams told the Tribune on Friday, one day after he dealt left-hander Neal Cotts to the Cubs for relievers David Aardsma and Carlos Vasquez.

Specifically, Williams was angry over speculation involving a proposal that would send pitcher Freddy Garcia to the Angels for 23-year-old right-hander Ervin Santana, a 16-game winner in 2006.

Ol' No. 2
11-18-2006, 12:59 PM
There's a new story on the Cubune website where KW says the Garcia for Santana deal is BS.NO!!! I heard it on the SCORE. It MUST be true!!!!

Iguana775
11-18-2006, 09:24 PM
If PK were dealt, another guy who could play 1B everyday would be signed or Thome would be put there and another hitter would be acquired, but I really don't think PK is going anywhere.

sign Big Frank!

Iguana775
11-18-2006, 09:26 PM
Here's (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseball/whitesox/cs-061117sox,1,6082485.story?coll=cs-home-headlines) KW take on the Garcia for Santana trade:

He's pissed cause it's true. ;) lol.

He'd be stupid to not make that trade if it just Garcia for Santana. and maybe prospect for either team.

Lillian
11-19-2006, 04:19 PM
Now that the Angels have signed Justin Speier I think the Sox will get Shields, or Santana from them, for Garcia, and another player. Maybe this was the piece of the puzzle that they were waiting for.

I still think that the Angels really want Konerko, though I haven't seen anything regarding that in the rumors. They will be looking for a big bat, now that they have lost out to the Cubs, in the Soriano sweepstakes.

Frater Perdurabo
11-19-2006, 04:27 PM
Now that the Angels have signed Justin Speier I think the Sox will get Shields, or Santana from them, for Garcia, and another player. Maybe this was the piece of the puzzle that they were waiting for.

I still think that the Angels really want Konerko, though I haven't seen anything regarding that in the rumors. They will be looking for a big bat, now that they have lost out to the Cubs, in the Soriano sweepstakes.

Interesting speculation. I've advocated considering dealing Konerko if it results in getting back younger pitching and (obviously) gives the Sox payroll flexibility to go after a true talent like Vernon Wells or Alex Rodriguez. In short, I believe anyone can be dealt if it makes the team better. Unlike most of the players most people on here "want" to trade (Uribe, Pods, Anderson, etc.), PK has value and it's obvious the Angels would covet - and potentially overvalue - him.

dickallen15
11-19-2006, 04:31 PM
Now that the Angels have signed Justin Speier I think the Sox will get Shields, or Santana from them, for Garcia, and another player. Maybe this was the piece of the puzzle that they were waiting for.

I still think that the Angels really want Konerko, though I haven't seen anything regarding that in the rumors. They will be looking for a big bat, now that they have lost out to the Cubs, in the Soriano sweepstakes.

The fact that Kenny Williams said the report was totally false indicates to me there was nothing to it. If the Angels offered Santana for Garcia and Williams gave them more than 2 seconds to change their minds before accepting it, the White Sox would need a new GM.

Jjav829
11-19-2006, 04:36 PM
Now that the Angels have signed Justin Speier I think the Sox will get Shields, or Santana from them, for Garcia, and another player. Maybe this was the piece of the puzzle that they were waiting for.

I still think that the Angels really want Konerko, though I haven't seen anything regarding that in the rumors. They will be looking for a big bat, now that they have lost out to the Cubs, in the Soriano sweepstakes.

How would the Angels signing Speier lead to them being willing to trade Santana? :?:

And maybe more importantly, why would the Angels trade Santana? They have Lackey, Weaver and an old, fat, injured Bartolo Colon. Maybe it makes some sense if they can land someone like Tejada, but that's about the only way they'd do it.

I think the Angels are more likely to turn their attention to Carlos Lee or J.D. Drew.

Lillian
11-19-2006, 04:42 PM
Interesting speculation. I've advocated considering dealing Konerko if it results in getting back younger pitching and (obviously) gives the Sox payroll flexibility to go after a true talent like Vernon Wells or Alex Rodriguez. In short, I believe anyone can be dealt if it makes the team better. Unlike most of the players most people on here "want" to trade (Uribe, Pods, Anderson, etc.), PK has value and it's obvious the Angels would covet - and potentially overvalue - him.

Well, it's nice to know that someone agrees with this idea. I think the Sox are too slow, and depend too much on the long ball. If we didn't already have a bunch of other guys who are also slow sluggers, it wouldn't be so necessary. But with Thome, Crede, Konerko, and even A.J., and certainly Paulie, they all just clog the bases.

As I said earlier in this thread, I think that dealing both Garcia and Konerko, for Santana, Shields and Figgins could make this team better, especially when you contemplate how we might use the money freed up. Like you, I'd much prefer to spend it on someone like Wells, Young, or Crawford.

The other thing that I find interesting is that no one here seems to appreciate Gloads potential. He would be inexpensive, very good defensively, and likely hit .300 or better. If we could bring in Wells, his power would replace Konerko's, and Gload wouldn't need to hit more than 15 or 20 homers, which I think is very realistic for him.

Lillian
11-19-2006, 04:45 PM
The fact that Kenny Williams said the report was totally false indicates to me there was nothing to it. If the Angels offered Santana for Garcia and Williams gave them more than 2 seconds to change their minds before accepting it, the White Sox would need a new GM.

If you really want an explanation of why Kenny would deny the rumor, see my previous post in this thread.

Frater Perdurabo
11-19-2006, 04:46 PM
:tomatoaward

Lillian
11-19-2006, 04:47 PM
How would the Angels signing Speier lead to them being willing to trade Santana? :?:

And maybe more importantly, why would the Angels trade Santana? They have Lackey, Weaver and an old, fat, injured Bartolo Colon. Maybe it makes some sense if they can land someone like Tejada, but that's about the only way they'd do it.

I think the Angels are more likely to turn their attention to Carlos Lee or J.D. Drew.

They had already reportedly been shopping Santana. I don't know why. You would have to ask them. However, in that it has been reported, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the idea.

Lillian
11-19-2006, 04:54 PM
I just read something on the Fox site saying "Trade talks between the White Sox and Rangers involving right-hander Jon Garland have cooled, FOXSports.com has learned, though it is possible the deal could be revived later.

That may also increase the possiblity of something with the Angels, who were the other team apparently closest to dealing with the Sox.

Here's the link: http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6185140

samram
11-19-2006, 05:04 PM
I just read something on the Fox site saying "Trade talks between the White Sox and Rangers involving right-hander Jon Garland have cooled, FOXSports.com has learned, though it is possible the deal could be revived later.

That may also increase the possiblity of something with the Angels, who were the other team apparently closest to dealing with the Sox.

Here's the link: http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6185140

Where does it say the Angels and Sox have been talking about anything? Where is that mentioned anywhere other than the report KW shot down? I think he's standing pat until Zito and Schmidt are signed.

NardiWasHere
11-19-2006, 05:40 PM
Well, it's nice to know that someone agrees with this idea. I think the Sox are too slow, and depend too much on the long ball. If we didn't already have a bunch of other guys who are also slow sluggers, it wouldn't be so necessary. But with Thome, Crede, Konerko, and even A.J., and certainly Paulie, they all just clog the bases.

Ok here's a question for everyone... In 2005, why didn't anyone complain about being too slow? It was the exact same lineup except for slow-Jim, we had slow-Carl/slow-Frank.....

The difference was in the pitching.... not the speed of our 3-4-5-6 hitters....

hi im skot
11-19-2006, 05:49 PM
Ok here's a question for everyone... In 2005, why didn't anyone complain about being too slow? It was the exact same lineup except for slow-Jim, we had slow-Carl/slow-Frank.....

The difference was in the pitching.... not the speed of our 3-4-5-6 hitters....

For much of 2005, Podsednik hadn't lost his step yet.

The pitching was the obvious problem, but we couldn't get the top of the order on base this year, either.

Lillian
11-19-2006, 05:51 PM
Ok here's a question for everyone... In 2005, why didn't anyone complain about being too slow? It was the exact same lineup except for slow-Jim, we had slow-Carl/slow-Frank.....

The difference was in the pitching.... not the speed of our 3-4-5-6 hitters....

Yes, but we did have a very effective leadoff man with speed, who was a legitimate base stealing threat. Moreover, we could have used more all around team speed then, as well. Of course, the real problem last year was the pitching. This suggested deal could improve our overall team pitching.

pearso66
11-19-2006, 05:52 PM
I don't believe these rumors at all, but if they did happen, and as someone said, maybe Santana/Sheilds/Figgins for Garcia/Konerko, Why trade for Jones or Wells, put a deal that was already mentioned, Vazquez/Uribe (another speculated rumor) for Young. You then have
CF: BA
LF: Figgins
RF: Dye
3b:Crede
ss: Young
2b: Iguchi
C: AJ

and the only opening is 1b. The Sox are looking to move Fields to left to get him to the majors, if they trade Konerko, wouldn't they then think to shift him to 1st and play him instead of Gload? I like Gload, but it seems like a lot of Sox fans put a ton of pride in our backup 1st basemen. I don't remember the guys name (slipped my mind) but a few years ago we had one who a few wanted to get rid of Konerko to let him play, and then he left and showed he coudln't handle the job. Who's to say that if Gload isn't played only in positions where he can be successful, that he wouldn't turn into a .250 hitter with his 12 homers. That is not what you want out of a 1st baseman.

NardiWasHere
11-19-2006, 05:53 PM
For much of 2005, Podsednik hadn't lost his step yet.

The pitching was the obvious problem, but we couldn't get the top of the order on base this year, either.

Ok, but the problem isn't the speed in the middle of the order.... Paul Konerko has always been slow. Jermaine Dye didn't run any differently between 2005 and 2006. Jim Thome isn't any different from Carl/Frank...

To say the Sox' problem is with the SPEED OF THE MIDDLE OF THE ORDER is just moronic.

Lillian
11-19-2006, 07:48 PM
Ok, but the problem isn't the speed in the middle of the order.... Paul Konerko has always been slow. Jermaine Dye didn't run any differently between 2005 and 2006. Jim Thome isn't any different from Carl/Frank...

To say the Sox' problem is with the SPEED OF THE MIDDLE OF THE ORDER is just moronic.

We all have our own opinions, but Ozzie has expressly stated that he wants more team speed. Exactly where in the lineup, and at what positions, I don't know. Of course, leadoff is the obvious place, but it wouldn't hurt to have a couple of other players who weren't among the slowest in the league.

Lillian
11-19-2006, 07:55 PM
I don't believe these rumors at all, but if they did happen, and as someone said, maybe Santana/Sheilds/Figgins for Garcia/Konerko, Why trade for Jones or Wells, put a deal that was already mentioned, Vazquez/Uribe (another speculated rumor) for Young. You then have
CF: BA
LF: Figgins
RF: Dye
3b:Crede
ss: Young
2b: Iguchi
C: AJ

and the only opening is 1b. The Sox are looking to move Fields to left to get him to the majors, if they trade Konerko, wouldn't they then think to shift him to 1st and play him instead of Gload? I like Gload, but it seems like a lot of Sox fans put a ton of pride in our backup 1st basemen. I don't remember the guys name (slipped my mind) but a few years ago we had one who a few wanted to get rid of Konerko to let him play, and then he left and showed he coudln't handle the job. Who's to say that if Gload isn't played only in positions where he can be successful, that he wouldn't turn into a .250 hitter with his 12 homers. That is not what you want out of a 1st baseman.

First base is Gloads best position. He's an excellent fielding first baseman.
He is regarded by many to be a very good line drive hitter, who can spray the ball to all fields, and hit lefties, as well as righties. He has always hit, a both the minor league level, and at the major league level, in his limited opportunities. The reason that he has never been able to earn a place as a starter is that most teams only want first basemen with big power potential.

dickallen15
11-19-2006, 07:59 PM
Yes, but we did have a very effective leadoff man with speed, who was a legitimate base stealing threat. Moreover, we could have used more all around team speed then, as well. Of course, the real problem last year was the pitching. This suggested deal could improve our overall team pitching.
The leadoff man lost his speed halfway through the season. Even without it the White Sox were 11-1 in the playoffs. Pitching is what the White Sox need, the offense is fine.

Lillian
11-19-2006, 08:25 PM
It might be constructive if those of you who are raising these questions, would read my other posts in this thread. I have clearly stated that pitching should be the main objective. Here is what I stated, in response to MrX :
Originally Posted by MrX, when he referred to the K.W. denial. http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=1413983#post1413983)
There's a new story on the Cubune website where KW says the Garcia for Santana deal is BS.

"What the article specifically quotes Williams as saying is; "It's sad to me that fans are being misled". He goes on; "I will say for the record it's absolutely untrue, and I'll answer that question because there has been so much speculated that is completely off-base. I don't want our fans fooled."

My reaction is to wonder why he felt a need to address this particular rumor at all, if it's just another baseless rumor. There have been plenty of other deals about which many have speculated, and he never dispelled those. No, I think it may be an instance of "The lady (the G.M.) doth protest too much, methinks".

As many of us have said, the reported deal is too good to be true for the Sox. K.W. clearly states that he doesn't want Sox fans to be "misled", and "fooled". Could such a statement be intended to avoid disappointment when fans discover the details of the deal, and learn that it's not as attractive as the rumor suggests?

This one just has too many pieces that fit, to dismiss it all together. The Sox are shopping Garcia, whom the Angels covet. The Angels need some veteran pitching, to go along with a young staff. They have the lead off guy whom we covet, as Ozzie loves Figgins. They have the bullpen surplus. They also have been shopping Santana, and Williams wants young starting pitching.
I'm sorry, but I still think that Konerko is in their discussions. I've already stated my reasons for such speculation, but the most compelling element is that the Angels covet him perhaps more than any of our players, and L.A. is the one team for which Konerko would probably agree to wave his no trade clause.
This latest comment by Williams only heightens my curiosity. If Paulie were to be included in this deal, it's easy to see how Kenny would want to try to soften the blow to Sox fans, when they discover that their fan favorite was being dealt."

Now we can add the following developments, none of which diminish the plausability of this scenario: One of the players that the Angels were after, Soriano, looks like he's going to the Cubs. The Angels have signed Speire, and now have perhaps the strongest bullpen in baseball. And finally, talks have apparently broken off between the Sox and the Rangers.

It is not hard to see how a deal could fit both teams. My original suggestion was Garcia and Konerko for Santana, Shields and Figgins.
That also frees up money for the Sox to pursue an impact player for center field, like Andruw Jones, or Vernon Wells.
If you'll notice, that could still leave us with 6 starters: Santana, Buerhle, Garland, Contreras, Vasquez, and McCarthy, so we still would have one starter to use as trade bait, if we don't sign a free agent. And with Shields in our bullpen, we have accomplished that intended goal of shoring up the pen.

pearso66
11-19-2006, 09:25 PM
First base is Gloads best position. He's an excellent fielding first baseman.
He is regarded by many to be a very good line drive hitter, who can spray the ball to all fields, and hit lefties, as well as righties. He has always hit, a both the minor league level, and at the major league level, in his limited opportunities. The reason that he has never been able to earn a place as a starter is that most teams only want first basemen with big power potential.

I agree that 1st is Gloads best position, in fact it should be the only position he plays. But they were already toying with the idea of moving Fields to left so that they coudl bring him up. However if they traded Konerko, and got Figgins to play left, why try to put him in the OF when they want to get him up, and have his bat be the one to replace Konerko's at 1st base. I think 1st woudl be easier for him to learn than left since he is a 3rd baseman, and he has more pop in his bat than Gload.

Frater Perdurabo
11-19-2006, 09:33 PM
I agree that 1st is Gloads best position, in fact it should be the only position he plays. But they were already toying with the idea of moving Fields to left so that they coudl bring him up. However if they traded Konerko, and got Figgins to play left, why try to put him in the OF when they want to get him up, and have his bat be the one to replace Konerko's at 1st base. I think 1st woudl be easier for him to learn than left since he is a 3rd baseman, and he has more pop in his bat than Gload.

Actually, since Figgins can play center field (thus backing up Anderson), Fields could be used in the Mackowiak role, backing up left, third and first. This would make Mackowiak expendable.

Lillian
11-19-2006, 09:47 PM
I agree that 1st is Gloads best position, in fact it should be the only position he plays. But they were already toying with the idea of moving Fields to left so that they coudl bring him up. However if they traded Konerko, and got Figgins to play left, why try to put him in the OF when they want to get him up, and have his bat be the one to replace Konerko's at 1st base. I think 1st woudl be easier for him to learn than left since he is a 3rd baseman, and he has more pop in his bat than Gload.

I would be very surprised if Fields could put up the same kind of numbers that Gload could provide, in his rookie year. He may have great potential, but I can't imagine using him at an offensive position, until he has proven himself.
And having to learn the position on top of that, is just not plausible.
Gload is an established skilled first baseman. I really don't think that many baseball people doubt that Ross would be a .300 hitter, right now.
You might find it instructive to compare Fields' numbers at Charlotte last year with the numbers that Ross put up in 2005, while he was rehabing there.

In 236 at bats, he hit .364, with 22 doubles, 15 homers, and 45 RBI's.

That came on the heels of his 2004 season with the Sox in which he hit:

In 246 at bats, .321 avg., 16 doubles, and 44 RBI's.

And you know that Gload hit .327 last year. The guy can hit. Fields would not be expected to hit anywhere near that well, as a rookie. And remember that Gload is the best defensive first baseman the Sox have.

NardiWasHere
11-19-2006, 11:56 PM
Gload is an established skilled first baseman. I really don't think that many baseball people doubt that Ross would be a .300 hitter, right now.



:?:
Come on now. I like the guy and all, but what are you talking about?

Gload is established? Since when?

.300 hitter right now? This is like a Cub Fan's opinion on Todd Hollandsworth circa 2004. If not many baseball people would doubt Gload could hit .300 why has he never stuck around a team... or even been a STARTER?? It isn't just the pop... Look at a Sean Casey type guy.

Let's recap- You dislike the lineup because Konerko-Thome-Dye aren't FAST enough.... You wouldn't mind getting rid of Paul Konerko (40hrs, 100+rbi guy) to make room for Ross Gload and Chone Figgins (a nice, fun player, but just a very good utility player/ supersub).... and you project Ross Gload as a .300 hitter over the course of a full season while starting.

:smokin:

spiffie
11-20-2006, 12:32 AM
At some point in this thread I began to read it as if there was a suggestion of a lineup which included both Ross Gload and Chone Figgins, and at that point I felt like I would never be clean or happy again. If Kenny Williams were to create a team in which that was a possibility, and it didn't somehow end up with A-Rod at SS, Crede still at 3B, and Vernon Wells in CF, I think I would end up going all Milton Waddams on USCF.

Lillian
11-20-2006, 05:08 AM
:?:
Come on now. I like the guy and all, but what are you talking about?

Gload is established? Since when?

.300 hitter right now? This is like a Cub Fan's opinion on Todd Hollandsworth circa 2004. If not many baseball people would doubt Gload could hit .300 why has he never stuck around a team... or even been a STARTER?? It isn't just the pop... Look at a Sean Casey type guy.

Let's recap- You dislike the lineup because Konerko-Thome-Dye aren't FAST enough.... You wouldn't mind getting rid of Paul Konerko (40hrs, 100+rbi guy) to make room for Ross Gload and Chone Figgins (a nice, fun player, but just a very good utility player/ supersub).... and you project Ross Gload as a .300 hitter over the course of a full season while starting.
:smokin:

It isn't that I am so enamored with Gload. It's just that realistically you can't expect the Sox to field an All Star caliber player at every position. I think that if you ultimately can use the Konerko and Garcia salaries to acquire an impact player in center, then we could afford to have a guy of Gload's ability, be serviceable at a bargain rate.
Look, the guy is a career .300 major league hitter, albeit in limited play. But if you look at the trend, he has a .325 average over his last two more regular, uninjured, major league seasons. Moreover, he is a career .300 minor league hitter. I think those are pretty good credentials. He hits lefties, as well as righties. If you talk to guys in our organization, they will tell you that he is a very good, line drive, spray hitter. He's very good defensively, at first base, and he can run a little. Most of all, he is CHEAP.

Figgins is not a Star either. However, he would give us a serviceable lead off guy, who is versatile. Again, he would not cost us that much. If Pods could be expected to regain his early 2005 performance level, he would be fine, but most of us seem to doubt that. '

Bottum line is, if we don't have to degrade our starting pitching, I'd be satisfied to put a lineup on the field, something like what I suggested, and will repeat here:

Figgins LF
Iguchi 2nd
Dye RF
Thome DH
Wells CF or Crawford
Crede 3rd
Gload 1st
Uribe SS
A.J. C

I don't see how you can acquire an impact type center fielder, and retain all of our best players, without degrading the pitching. Those kinds of "fantasy" constructs are fun, but unrealistic. The Sox can't spend like the Yankees, or apparently the 2007 Cubs!

Lillian
11-20-2006, 05:12 AM
At some point in this thread I began to read it as if there was a suggestion of a lineup which included both Ross Gload and Chone Figgins, and at that point I felt like I would never be clean or happy again. If Kenny Williams were to create a team in which that was a possibility, and it didn't somehow end up with A-Rod at SS, Crede still at 3B, and Vernon Wells in CF, I think I would end up going all Milton Waddams on USCF.

Perhaps you should read the previous post. I'm afraid that you are not going to see A-Rod, Crede and Wells in the same lineup, without giving up something. How do you add two players of that caliber without seriously degrading your pitching?

My suggestion actually might improve our pitching.

Lillian
11-20-2006, 05:21 AM
Ok, but the problem isn't the speed in the middle of the order.... Paul Konerko has always been slow. Jermaine Dye didn't run any differently between 2005 and 2006. Jim Thome isn't any different from Carl/Frank...

To say the Sox' problem is with the SPEED OF THE MIDDLE OF THE ORDER is just moronic.

Of course, I don't think that we need to have speed all through the middle of the lineup. However, Ozzie has stated quite clearly that he wants more team speed. Last year we were very slow, station to station from the 3rd, through the 7th slot, and I mean really slow. While it was a very potent lineup, it was probably the slowest in the majors.
I don't think that it's "moronic" to suggest one good hitter, who could also run a little in the middle of that part of our lineup. Therefore, I'd like to see a Wells, or Andruw Jones type guy batting where Paulie hit (in the 5 hole).

Lillian
11-20-2006, 05:31 AM
One final point, and then I will drop this, unless of course, someone's post needs a response; This insane Soriano signing means that Wells and Andruw Jones will likely not be signed by their respective clubs. Neither the Braves, nor the Blue Jays appear to be prepared to spend that kind of money.
Doesn't that increase the probability that they will be available via trade?
The question is, do we want a "rent a player", for one year in center. I'd say perhaps, if we can improve the pitching, at the same time.

spiffie
11-20-2006, 10:20 AM
Perhaps you should read the previous post. I'm afraid that you are not going to see A-Rod, Crede and Wells in the same lineup, without giving up something. How do you add two players of that caliber without seriously degrading your pitching?

My suggestion actually might improve our pitching.
My point was that if these suggestions culminate in Gload and the absolutely useless Figgins both starting on a daily basis for the Sox, then unless there are massive benefits somewhere else, not just some improvement, then this is a worse team than you started with. A markedly, substantially worse team.

A. Cavatica
11-20-2006, 08:54 PM
I'd have no problem going into the season with Gload at first (or a Gload/Fields platoon) if, through some chain of events, we had to sacrifice Konerko to get M. Young & V. Wells.

My reasoning: it's a lot easier to find a 1B than it is a SS or CF, especially at midseason when teams are dumping salary.

Lillian
11-21-2006, 06:52 AM
I'd have no problem going into the season with Gload at first (or a Gload/Fields platoon) if, through some chain of events, we had to sacrifice Konerko to get M. Young & V. Wells.

My reasoning: it's a lot easier to find a 1B than it is a SS or CF, especially at midseason when teams are dumping salary.

Your reasoning is correct. My sentiments, exactly.

The Immigrant
11-21-2006, 09:24 AM
I'd have no problem going into the season with Gload at first (or a Gload/Fields platoon) if, through some chain of events, we had to sacrifice Konerko to get M. Young & V. Wells.

My reasoning: it's a lot easier to find a 1B than it is a SS or CF, especially at midseason when teams are dumping salary.

If Konerko could somehow net us both Young and Wells (after the Kenny laces the winter meetings punch bowl with LSD), I'd be fine with Ronny Woo Woo playing 1B for us.

wdelaney72
11-21-2006, 09:36 AM
Teams do not trade away young, cheap (cheap being a player who has yet to receive their first FA contract) starting pitchers that have proven the ability to start on the MLB level. Erwin Santana is a good example of this, so if the Angels are shopping him something has to be wrong.

D. TODD
11-21-2006, 09:54 AM
Just say NO to Ross Gload as an everyday player in any and all trade scenarios. If PK is traded which I highly doubt, a first baseman of some sort must come to Chicago to replace him. Gload is not that replacement.

caulfield12
11-21-2006, 10:18 AM
Just say NO to Ross Gload as an everyday player in any and all trade scenarios. If PK is traded which I highly doubt, a first baseman of some sort must come to Chicago to replace him. Gload is not that replacement.

I wouldn't mind Figgins replacing Pods...but want no part of Gload getting 500 at-bats.

Figgins is still a young player and had a down year, partly attributable to being moved all over the field defensively. But that's what makes him available...you're not going to get Jose Reyes from the Mets!

samram
11-21-2006, 10:20 AM
Just say NO to Ross Gload as an everyday player in any and all trade scenarios. If PK is traded which I highly doubt, a first baseman of some sort must come to Chicago to replace him. Gload is not that replacement.

Right. If Gload was good enough to be an everyday player, he would be playing everyday somewhere.

thedudeabides
11-21-2006, 10:23 AM
Just say NO to Ross Gload as an everyday player in any and all trade scenarios. If PK is traded which I highly doubt, a first baseman of some sort must come to Chicago to replace him. Gload is not that replacement.

Barring major injury, I don't think you need to worry about seeing Gload as an everyday player for the Sox. I still don't understand some peoples fascination with him on this board.

Lillian
11-21-2006, 10:29 AM
Just say NO to Ross Gload as an everyday player in any and all trade scenarios. If PK is traded which I highly doubt, a first baseman of some sort must come to Chicago to replace him. Gload is not that replacement.

What is it exactly about Gload that you find so objectionable? We all know that he is not a power hitter, but what other aspects of his game don't you like? Remember, I'm only advocating this potential option. in order to free up payroll, which could possibly be used to acquire an impact center fielder.

I just don't see how you address the combined weaknesses of this team in center, ss, lead off and bullpen, while at least not degrading starting pitching, without giving up something. And what is the one thing that this team has in surplus, that we could consider trading, especially if we can get an impact player in center? How many homers did they hit last year?

caulfield12
11-21-2006, 10:45 AM
What is it exactly about Gload that you find so objectionable? We all know that he is not a power hitter, but what other aspects of his game don't you like? Remember, I'm only advocating this potential option. in order to free up payroll, which could possibly be used to acquire an impact center fielder.

I just don't see how you address the combined weaknesses of this team in center, ss, lead off and bullpen, while at least not degrading starting pitching, without giving up something. And what is the one thing that this team has in surplus, that we could consider trading, especially if we can get an impact player in center? How many homers did they hit last year?

They're not going to trade the captain of the team until the 2007 team has proven it cannot win the World Series. He will get at least one more year with the team's nucleus more or less together.

Ol' No. 2
11-21-2006, 10:52 AM
What is it exactly about Gload that you find so objectionable? We all know that he is not a power hitter, but what other aspects of his game don't you like? Remember, I'm only advocating this potential option. in order to free up payroll, which could possibly be used to acquire an impact center fielder.

I just don't see how you address the combined weaknesses of this team in center, ss, lead off and bullpen, while at least not degrading starting pitching, without giving up something. And what is the one thing that this team has in surplus, that we could consider trading, especially if we can get an impact player in center? How many homers did they hit last year?Gload's problem is that he's decent in all aspects of the game but not particularly good in any of them. He'd be fine as a starter for a .500 team, but not for a team that expects to win. A balanced lineup needs a certain amount of power in the middle. Replacing Konerko with Gload means you have to make that up somewhere else. Where are you going to do that? The payroll you'd free up would wind up getting spent on another power hitter to make up that gap. No real net gain.

samram
11-21-2006, 10:59 AM
Gload's problem is that he's decent in all aspects of the game but not particularly good in any of them. He'd be fine as a starter for a .500 team, but not for a team that expects to win. A balanced lineup needs a certain amount of power in the middle. Replacing Konerko with Gload means you have to make that up somewhere else. Where are you going to do that? The payroll you'd free up would wind up getting spent on another power hitter to make up that gap. No real net gain.

All of this is true, but I would also say that I don't know how well his numbers would hold up over 350-400, if not more, ABs. If he was that good, he could be traded for a good return.

caulfield12
11-21-2006, 11:05 AM
Wasn't Gload run through waivers at least once or twice last season without anyone biting?

Lillian
11-21-2006, 11:54 AM
Gload's problem is that he's decent in all aspects of the game but not particularly good in any of them. He'd be fine as a starter for a .500 team, but not for a team that expects to win. A balanced lineup needs a certain amount of power in the middle. Replacing Konerko with Gload means you have to make that up somewhere else. Where are you going to do that? The payroll you'd free up would wind up getting spent on another power hitter to make up that gap. No real net gain.

Yes, you're right, and this scenario includes getting an impact player, like Wells or Andruw Jones, to replace Anderson in center. I'm not necessarily recommending trading Brian, as we could need him in 2008, if we weren't able to extend Wells or Jones. The reasoning is as A. Cavatica said; " it's a lot easier to find a 1B than it is a SS or CF, especially at midseason when teams are dumping salary".

The advantage is that you have more speed, eliminate one of your offensive holes (center), don't degrade your defense, and end up with at least the same net production. It's hard to believe that Jones, or Wells + Gload, would not be better than Konerko + Anderson. Moreover, the elimination of the offensive hole in center, affords you the luxury of keeping Uribe at SS.

The only real downside to this idea, is that you are giving up a player who is locked in a contract for the next 4 years, in exchange for one who is in the last year of his contract. Personally, I don't like that contract with Konerko. Even with the crazy salaries being offered by the Cubs, Yankees, and now Dodgers, I think that $12 million a year is too much for a guy like Konerko. I understand that it is not at all out of line with these current salaries. However, I think I'd rather see us rent a few players for while, to see if this salary madness moderates.

At any rate, the highest priority should be pitching, and I think that a guy like Konerko provides a pretty valuable trading chip, which could be used to net an improvement in that department. I refer you back my original trade suggestion with the Angels.

One final note about Gload. The reason that I am suggesting this is that first base is the only position for which the Sox have a legitimate backup. Of all of our bench players, including Ozuna, Macowiak, Cintron, the two rookies, and Gload. Ross is the only one in whom I would have confidence to step in and be a consistently dependable starter. It's a case of working with what you have. We had better start getting used to that, if these free agents continue to garner the kinds of contracts we've been seeing. You simply can't make a shopping list, and then go out and buy every piece of the puzzle.

caulfield12
11-21-2006, 12:06 PM
Yes, you're right, and this scenario includes getting an impact player, like Wells or Andruw Jones, to replace Anderson in center. I'm not necessarily recommending trading Brian, as we could need him in 2008, if we weren't able to extend Wells or Jones. The reasoning is as A. Cavatica said; " it's a lot easier to find a 1B than it is a SS or CF, especially at midseason when teams are dumping salary".

The advantage is that you have more speed, eliminate one of your offensive holes (center), don't degrade your defense, and end up with at least the same net production. It's hard to believe that Jones, or Wells + Gload, would not be better than Konerko + Anderson. Moreover, the elimination of the offensive hole in center, affords you the luxury of keeping Uribe at SS.

The only real downside to this idea, is that you are giving up a player who is locked in a contract for the next 4 years, in exchange for one who is in the last year of his contract. Personally, I don't like that contract with Konerko. Even with the crazy salaries being offered by the Cubs, Yankees, and now Dodgers, I think that $12 million a year is too much for a guy like Konerko. I understand that it is not at all out of line with these current salaries. However, I think I'd rather see us rent a few players for while, to see if this salary madness moderates.

At any rate, the highest priority should be pitching, and I think that a guy like Konerko provides a pretty valuable trading chip, which could be used to net an improvement in that department. I refer you back my original trade suggestion with the Angels.

One final note about Gload. The reason that I am suggesting this is that first base is the only position for which the Sox have a legitimate backup. Of all of our bench players, including Ozuna, Macowiak, Cintron, the two rookies, and Gload. Ross is the only one in whom I would have confidence to step in and be a consistently dependable starter. It's a case of working with what you have. We had better start getting used to that, if these free agents continue to garner the kinds of contracts we've been seeing. You simply can't make a shopping list, and then go out and buy every piece of the puzzle.

Arguments can be made for Cintron at SS and Mackowiak in LF.

D. TODD
11-21-2006, 12:30 PM
Arguments can be made for Cintron at SS and Mackowiak in LF. I agree. Both have been solid everyday type guys. Gload has never been thought of as a solid everyday starter throughout his career. Who knows he may break out into something he has not been to this point, but I doubt it. He is no spring chicken and two years ago he couldn't even hold a bench spot and spent the year at AAA. As a previous poster pointed out he cleared wavers in the recent past as well, so no other team in the league see him as anything resembling a solid everyday guy. Gload is #25 if that on the Sox roster and nothing more. I also liked the comparison made to the Cub fans calling for Hollandsworth as a solid everyday player because of his solid numbers off the bench as a left handed stick a couple of years ago. Well,they got their wish, and that worked out like every GM in the league thought, "Holla" was a very sub par everyday left fielder.

I'm not a Gload hater, but he is what he is, and that's not an everyday player. Konerko to Gload is a drop of epic portportions!

Lillian
11-21-2006, 02:04 PM
Since so many question why I like Gload's bat, I thought that I'd compile some numbers to demonstrate his performance.
In a previous post, in this same thread, I presented his major league stats for 2004 and 2006. Here they are again:

2004 246 At bats, 16 doubles, 0 triples, 7 homers, 44 RBI's, .321 avg.
2006 156 At bats 8 doubles, 2 triples, 3 homers, 18 RBI's, .327

Over his last 1,765 at bats in AAA he compiled the following stats:

132 doubles, 25 triples, 78 homers, 362 RBI while hitting well over .300

That is 3 seasons worth of at bats, assuming 588 at bats a year.

That averages 44 doubles, 8 triples, 26 homers and 120 RBI's per year!!!

For a really good defensive first baseman, who can run a little, those are very solid numbers. He hits lefties almost as well as righties. Again, the only thing he can't give you is a lot of homers. This is why I think that he is our best bench player, and why I wouldn't be uncomfortable with him at first for a whole season.
Of course that depends upon replacing Konerko's power with another bat, preferably centerfield.

I know that AAA numbers do not equate to major league stats, but he has proven that he is not overmatched in the big leagues. I'll stop already, but I felt the need to defend my position, in that so many seem to think that this idea is crazy.
Thanks

caulfield12
11-21-2006, 03:32 PM
Since so many question why I like Gload's bat, I thought that I'd compile some numbers to demonstrate his performance.
In a previous post, in this same thread, I presented his major league stats for 2004 and 2006. Here they are again:

2004 246 At bats, 16 doubles, 0 triples, 7 homers, 44 RBI's, .321 avg.
2006 156 At bats 8 doubles, 2 triples, 3 homers, 18 RBI's, .327

Over his last 1,765 at bats in AAA he compiled the following stats:

132 doubles, 25 triples, 78 homers, 362 RBI while hitting well over .300

That is 3 seasons worth of at bats, assuming 588 at bats a year.

That averages 44 doubles, 8 triples, 26 homers and 120 RBI's per year!!!

For a really good defensive first baseman, who can run a little, those are very solid numbers. He hits lefties almost as well as righties. Again, the only thing he can't give you is a lot of homers. This is why I think that he is our best bench player, and why I wouldn't be uncomfortable with him at first for a whole season.
Of course that depends upon replacing Konerko's power with another bat, preferably centerfield.

I know that AAA numbers do not equate to major league stats, but he has proven that he is not overmatched in the big leagues. I'll stop already, but I felt the need to defend my position, in that so many seem to think that this idea is crazy.
Thanks

It is crazy....players like Mack and Ozuna and Gload have good numbers because they're almost always selectively used in situations that they would be the most successful in (according to the probability statistics Ozzie always relies upon for L/R match-ups).

Nobody was arguing earlier in the season that Ozuna should start every game...and that, by doing so, he would continue to hit .400.

Willie Harris hit .400 for about two months in Charlotte, and many were convinced (rightly so) he still would not be a starting major league player. Heck, Jimenez has done better since leaving the White Sox.

You also have to figure into those statistics Charlotte's stadium, and AAA pitching, which is not as talented as AA pitching in general.

I think we had an OLD 1B prospect (Leo Daigle) that tore up every single level of minor league pitching last year or the year before and he didn't get so much as a sniff of the big leagues.

Gload would be a poor man's Mark Grace. Unless our pitching was guaranteed to be at 3.5-3.75 ERA OR we replaced Konerko's salary with an even more expensive CFer (or SS in the Tejada mold) who put up the same numbers, it wouldn't make any sense.

maurice
11-21-2006, 03:43 PM
I think we had an OLD 1B prospect (Leo Daigle) that tore up every single level of minor league pitching last year or the year before and he didn't get so much as a sniff of the big leagues.

Nah, Daigle tore up A-ball at an advanced age, got promoted all the way up to Charlotte to show his stuff, and then proceeded to suck. The Sox cut him loose at the end of the season.

Lillian
11-21-2006, 03:55 PM
Nah, Daigle tore up A-ball at an advanced age, got promoted all the way up to Charlotte to show his stuff, and then proceeded to suck. The Sox cut him loose at the end of the season.

That's correct. I was just about to send a message, making that point. In all due respect to caulfield12, that isn't really a fair comparison. I have made my case for Gload in previous posts. He isn't Konerko, but he's not Leo Daigle either. Daigle never put up numbers at AAA, much less the majors.

Domeshot17
11-21-2006, 04:06 PM
cf12 with all do respect, please make better comparisons with former sox minor leaguers. Gload> Diagle, ervin santana> josh stewart. We all get it but its not even a valid comparison

Craig Grebeck
11-21-2006, 04:21 PM
Yes, you're right, and this scenario includes getting an impact player, like Wells or Andruw Jones, to replace Anderson in center. I'm not necessarily recommending trading Brian, as we could need him in 2008, if we weren't able to extend Wells or Jones. The reasoning is as A. Cavatica said; " it's a lot easier to find a 1B than it is a SS or CF, especially at midseason when teams are dumping salary".

The advantage is that you have more speed, eliminate one of your offensive holes (center), don't degrade your defense, and end up with at least the same net production. It's hard to believe that Jones, or Wells + Gload, would not be better than Konerko + Anderson. Moreover, the elimination of the offensive hole in center, affords you the luxury of keeping Uribe at SS.

The only real downside to this idea, is that you are giving up a player who is locked in a contract for the next 4 years, in exchange for one who is in the last year of his contract. Personally, I don't like that contract with Konerko. Even with the crazy salaries being offered by the Cubs, Yankees, and now Dodgers, I think that $12 million a year is too much for a guy like Konerko. I understand that it is not at all out of line with these current salaries. However, I think I'd rather see us rent a few players for while, to see if this salary madness moderates.

At any rate, the highest priority should be pitching, and I think that a guy like Konerko provides a pretty valuable trading chip, which could be used to net an improvement in that department. I refer you back my original trade suggestion with the Angels.

One final note about Gload. The reason that I am suggesting this is that first base is the only position for which the Sox have a legitimate backup. Of all of our bench players, including Ozuna, Macowiak, Cintron, the two rookies, and Gload. Ross is the only one in whom I would have confidence to step in and be a consistently dependable starter. It's a case of working with what you have. We had better start getting used to that, if these free agents continue to garner the kinds of contracts we've been seeing. You simply can't make a shopping list, and then go out and buy every piece of the puzzle.
Which equates less power. And yes, Wells + Gload is worse when you factor in that Wells would cost an infinite amount of prospects. Gload is a career minor leaguer who would never put up the stats you projected over a full season.

Assuming the lineup is as follows:
Tadahito
Gload
Dye
Thome
Wells
Crede
A.J.
Uribe
Sweeney

Using their ZIPS projections and Wells' median line (.345 OBA and .500 SLG) they would score 5.491 runs per game. That's not bad, but I think Wells will fall down pretty far from this season. He had a dramatic increase in OPS this season. I think a lineup of...

Tadahito
Omar Vizquel
Thome
Konerko
Dye
Crede
A.J./Decent platoon partner or upgrade altogether
Sweeney/Cruz
Anderson

Say, they keep Konerko and upgrade in LF with a Jose Cruz/Ryan Sweeney platoon I think we can become more financially efficient

caulfield12
11-21-2006, 04:51 PM
That's correct. I was just about to send a message, making that point. In all due respect to caulfield12, that isn't really a fair comparison. I have made my case for Gload in previous posts. He isn't Konerko, but he's not Leo Daigle either. Daigle never put up numbers at AAA, much less the majors.


Since when is the talent on most teams better in AAA than AA?

It's easier to hit in AAA, the stuff is less overwhelming and there's less control demonstrated by pitchers...a lot of the veteran AAA types like a Tim Redding are usually around the plate.

Felix Diaz could easily be equated with Santana...Diaz was the #4 prospect in the Giants system when we traded for him. My point is that I never believe anything about White Sox prospects because there have been way too many failures to count, especially in the pitching department.

caulfield12
11-21-2006, 04:54 PM
Which equates less power. And yes, Wells + Gload is worse when you factor in that Wells would cost an infinite amount of prospects. Gload is a career minor leaguer who would never put up the stats you projected over a full season.

Assuming the lineup is as follows:
Tadahito
Gload
Dye
Thome
Wells
Crede
A.J.
Uribe
Sweeney

Using their ZIPS projections and Wells' median line (.345 OBA and .500 SLG) they would score 5.491 runs per game. That's not bad, but I think Wells will fall down pretty far from this season. He had a dramatic increase in OPS this season. I think a lineup of...

Tadahito
Omar Vizquel
Thome
Konerko
Dye
Crede
A.J./Decent platoon partner or upgrade altogether
Sweeney/Cruz
Anderson

Say, they keep Konerko and upgrade in LF with a Jose Cruz/Ryan Sweeney platoon I think we can become more financially efficient

You package one of our starters (they have to replace Lilly) with Anderson and maybe you don't have to include Fields or Sweeney (Haeger, McCulloch) if the trade is done in July.

Wells is GONE after next season, the Jays know this and they would be stupid not to take the best offer.

Lillian
11-21-2006, 05:24 PM
Since when is the talent on most teams better in AAA than AA?

It's easier to hit in AAA, the stuff is less overwhelming and there's less control demonstrated by pitchers...a lot of the veteran AAA types like a Tim Redding are usually around the plate.

Felix Diaz could easily be equated with Santana...Diaz was the #4 prospect in the Giants system when we traded for him. My point is that I never believe anything about White Sox prospects because there have been way too many failures to count, especially in the pitching department.

Daigle's numbers were at Winston Salem, which is A ball, not AA.

Tragg
11-21-2006, 05:45 PM
Gload's problem is that he's decent in all aspects of the game but not particularly good in any of them. He'd be fine as a starter for a .500 team, but not for a team that expects to win. A balanced lineup needs a certain amount of power in the middle. Replacing Konerko with Gload means you have to make that up somewhere else. Where are you going to do that? The payroll you'd free up would wind up getting spent on another power hitter to make up that gap. No real net gain.
You need to have power in Center and Left, if you are going to give up power at first.
Wells is another one off of a career year...his career OBP is reaally low at .336 and in his career year, it was only .357. Maybe he'll build on that, but I don't see how Wells and Gload are better than Anderson and Konerko.
Paul Konerko's a producer, he's only costing $3 mill more than Juan Pierre for goodness sakes; I say we keep him, barring some crazy offer.

Ol' No. 2
11-21-2006, 06:46 PM
You need to have power in Center and Left, if you are going to give up power at first.
Wells is another one off of a career year...his career OBP is reaally low at .336 and in his career year, it was only .357. Maybe he'll build on that, but I don't see how Wells and Gload are better than Anderson and Konerko.
Paul Konerko's a producer, he's only costing $3 mill more than Juan Pierre for goodness sakes; I say we keep him, barring some crazy offer.:mg: That certainly puts things in perspective.

I agree, on balance I'd rather have Konerko and Anderson than Wells and Gload. With Wells and Gload, you pretty much know what you're going to get. Anderson at least has an upside, and if he doesn't come through, they've got Sweeney waiting in the wings.

caulfield12
11-21-2006, 08:32 PM
You need to have power in Center and Left, if you are going to give up power at first.
Wells is another one off of a career year...his career OBP is reaally low at .336 and in his career year, it was only .357. Maybe he'll build on that, but I don't see how Wells and Gload are better than Anderson and Konerko.
Paul Konerko's a producer, he's only costing $3 mill more than Juan Pierre for goodness sakes; I say we keep him, barring some crazy offer.


The Twins got away from having power on the corners (unless you consider J. Jones a power hitter) with the majority of the pop coming from Torii Hunter for most of the past five years.

And they didn't have power at first, they had Doug Mientkiewicz. Of course, Cuddyer and Morneau are a different story now.

caulfield12
11-21-2006, 08:37 PM
:mg: That certainly puts things in perspective.

I agree, on balance I'd rather have Konerko and Anderson than Wells and Gload. With Wells and Gload, you pretty much know what you're going to get. Anderson at least has an upside, and if he doesn't come through, they've got Sweeney waiting in the wings.


Where the argument becomes more interesting is putting a player a step up from Gload (S. Casey, Hatteberg 2-3 years ago, Durazo 2-3 years ago, Overbay, Catalanotto) at 1B with Wells in CF.

Ultimately, it always comes down to whether or not the White Sox are willing to gamble again with Anderson and Mackowiak or find a "surer" solution.