PDA

View Full Version : The not so Texas sized Rangers trade rumor thread


Chw2007
11-17-2006, 10:53 AM
While listening to ESPN 1000 last night i heard a rumor that the Texas Rangers wanted Jon Garland for several of their top prospects and maybe a couple of proven players. but KW isn't getting all he can out of this deal so it's prolly goin down the sink. i wouldn't wanna give away garland he was the best pitcher on the staff last year.

WhiteSoxFan84
11-17-2006, 10:56 AM
OK, listen up new guy, lol jk, but yeh seriously, take it easy on these ESPN rumors. What's the keyword in that sentence? Easy, yes. But yeh, if you're going to post those things post them under "What's The Score". Or just don't post them at all because most of them stuff on ESPN1000 is Bruce Levine sitting at home in his boxers and wifebeater thinking up of a rumor no one else has started yet.

Chw2007
11-17-2006, 10:57 AM
OK, listen up new guy, lol jk, but yeh seriously, take it easy on these ESPN rumors. What's the keyword in that sentence? Easy, yes. But yeh, if you're going to post those things post them under "What's The Score". Or just don't post them at all because most of them stuff on ESPN1000 is Bruce Levine sitting at home in his boxers and wifebeater thinking up of a rumor no one else has started yet.

lol sorry

Sox Fan 35
11-17-2006, 11:20 AM
I can't take much more of this.:angry: :puking:

jenn2080
11-17-2006, 11:21 AM
Shoot me please!

Myrtle72
11-17-2006, 11:22 AM
Shoot me please!

*pow!*

:mg:

:tongue:

SABRSox
11-17-2006, 11:23 AM
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:OMxt6QiMyq6UBM:http://home.in.tum.de/%7Epaula/mwc/pic/623g.jpg

jdm2662
11-17-2006, 11:24 AM
Shoot me please!

Sorry, I can't do that. I can't shoot people I like. :D:

Don't you all love the off season?

Mr.1Dog
11-17-2006, 11:24 AM
How many days until opening day?

LuvSox
11-17-2006, 11:25 AM
WOW! :mg:

Myrtle72
11-17-2006, 11:25 AM
How many days until opening day?

Too many.

spiffie
11-17-2006, 11:29 AM
I can't take much more of this.:angry: :puking:

Shoot me please!

http://www.randomgoogle.com/

Sure to take you to many places on the internet free of appalling trade rumors. This may not be helpful if you suffer from a medical condition requiring you to be logged onto the "What's the Score" forum 24 hours per day for your own health and safety. I thoroughly recommend it for anyone who needs to be doing something on the internet but just can't see one more A-Rod trade thread. You might even learn something new.

jenn2080
11-17-2006, 11:33 AM
How many days until opening day?


136 and counting.

QCIASOXFAN
11-17-2006, 11:38 AM
136 and counting.
:(: Thats depressing.:thud:

crazyozzie02
11-17-2006, 01:18 PM
:(: Thats depressing.:thud:

At least we have a good bears team to watch hopefully until february. (my birthday is on the superbowl, so im praying to god that i get the best b-day present ever!)

maurice
11-17-2006, 01:32 PM
i heard a rumor that the Texas Rangers wanted Jon Garland for several of their top prospects and maybe a couple of proven players.

Every team in the majors wants to get Jon Garland for prospects and maybe a couple of proven players. He's a young, healthy starting pitcher with a solid track record. That's the most valuable commodity in baseball.

rowand33
11-17-2006, 01:32 PM
From rotoworld:

The Chicago Tribune's Phil Rogers believes the Rangers might be willing to give up Akinori Otsuka, John Danks and Nick Masset for Javier Vazquez or Freddy Garcia.

We're sure Texas would also throw in Mark Teixeira, if only the White Sox had anywhere for him to play. If Brian Anderson was also involved, maybe it'd make some sense for the Rangers to give up their closer and a top pitching prospect. For one of the starters alone, it'd be an awful idea.
Source: Chicago Tribune (http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/cs-061116whispers,1,5139728.story?coll=cs-whitesox-headlines)

this would be a hell of a trade for the Sox, especially if it's Javy

rowand33
11-17-2006, 01:35 PM
here's numerous other white sox rumors from rotoworld. we're all over the place.

Aaron Rowand has drawn inquiries from several teams, and the Phillies could consider moving him in the right deal.

It's believed the White Sox would like Rowand back, though maybe not enough to give up Mark Buehrle or Freddy Garcia for him. If the Phillies traded Rowand, they'd likely install Shane Victorino as their regular center fielder.
Source: Philadelphia Daily News (http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/sports/16034547.htm)

The Chicago Sun-Times says the White Sox have strong interest in Andruw Jones.

Even though he's represented by Scott Boras? Boras has said that Andruw has no intention of waiving his no-trade clause and leaving Atlanta. "Andruw has the control and Andruw is going to be an Atlanta Brave for the '07 season, that's clear," the agent said last month. "He'll see how the season plays out and what the team's situation is."
Source: Chicago Sun-Times (http://www.suntimes.com/sports/deluca/139850,CST-SPT-deluca17.article)

Sources told the Chicago Sun-Times that the Angels are looking to trade for Freddy Garcia.

We suppose that's possible, but the report goes on to say that the Angels would surrender Ervin Santana and more, which seems completely ridiculous. Santana is under control for five years to Garcia's one and finished with a 4.28 ERA to Garcia's 4.53 mark last season. He's the far more valuable property.
Source: Chicago Sun-Times (http://www.suntimes.com/sports/deluca/139850,CST-SPT-deluca17.article)

Pierzynski 12
11-17-2006, 01:37 PM
Damn it. Why can't we dump Contreras!?:violin:

oeo
11-17-2006, 01:38 PM
Damn it. Why can't we dump Contreras!?:violin:

Why the hell do you want to 'dump' Contreras?

You don't 'dump' a, when healthy, Cy Young candidate. Actually, you don't 'dump' any of our SP...we better be getting some value in return.

TheOldRoman
11-17-2006, 01:38 PM
:bs:
"Throw in" Mark Teixiera? Why would the Rangers be so willing to dump one of the best young power hitters in the game? This is ridiculous. If that deal was offered to the Sox, KW would accept it in half a second. Then either Thome or Konerko would wave bye bye. Either that, or they could spin Teixeira for top prospects. That is a no brainer.

Which is exactly why it is made up BS.

rowand33
11-17-2006, 01:38 PM
Free agent Alex Gonzalez reportedly has a three-year, $15 million offer on the table, likely from either the White Sox or the Reds.

The Blue Jays have also been talking to Gonzalez, but they didn't make the offer. If Gonzalez can get this kind of deal, Julio Lugo at four years and $32 million would look very attractive. Of course, if it's the White Sox that sign Gonzalez, the same teams that are considering Gonzalez right now would likely covet Juan Uribe. Uribe is about as good defensively and has more offensive potential. Should the Reds get Gonzalez, Brandon Phillips would stay at second base. It'd make the decision to re-sign Juan Castro look awfully redundant.
Source: Boston.com (http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/redsox/extras/extra_bases/2006/11/gonzalez_in_dem.html)

ewwwwwww

Pierzynski 12
11-17-2006, 01:39 PM
Why the hell do you want to 'dump' Contreras?

You don't 'dump' a, when healthy, Cy Young candidate. Actually, you don't 'dump' any of our SP...we better be getting some value in return.

Contreras is an old fruit basket. I want a younger arm if we can trade him.

Sox Fan 35
11-17-2006, 01:39 PM
I would love to see Andruw Jones in a White Sox uniform.

Frater Perdurabo
11-17-2006, 01:40 PM
I'd bet a dozen doughnuts that KW floats a whole bunch of rumours just as a smokescreen. In fact, I'll bet most of the better GMs do this too.
:rolleyes:

TheOldRoman
11-17-2006, 01:42 PM
Contreras is an old fruit basket. I want a younger arm if we can trade him.
Well, there you have it. More well thought out commentary from Pierzynski12.:rolleyes:

oeo
11-17-2006, 01:43 PM
I say Kenny waits this out.

Wait until Zito is signed, and whoever loses out in that is going to get desperate. We have interest from the Mets, Yankees, Angels, Phillies, and Rangers (maybe even more). I'm thinking someone is going to get very desperate and make a move they don't want to make; we're going to make out like bandits.

samram
11-17-2006, 01:45 PM
ARow's "not enough" to get for Buehrle or Garcia? No ****.:rolleyes:

BanditJimmy
11-17-2006, 01:46 PM
Trading Contreras who is locked up for 3 years at about $9 million per is about the worst move the Sox could make. As someone said, Contreras is a CY candidate when healthy.

Someone is going to pay V. Padilla $10 million per seaon this off season..... now tell me how Contreras is not a bargain.

WizardsofOzzie
11-17-2006, 01:47 PM
Well, there you have it. More well thought out commentary from Pierzynski12.:rolleyes:
:tealpolice:

Norberto7
11-17-2006, 01:48 PM
Why isn't this in the Clubhouse?

oeo
11-17-2006, 01:50 PM
Contreras is an old fruit basket. I want a younger arm if we can trade him.

Well, I think you need to get over that, Contreras will be here next year. And if he's healthy, he will be our #1.

And you also need to use a different word...you do not 'dump' a guy like Contreras (or any of our SP). You better be getting something very good in return, and that != 'dumping'.

Frater Perdurabo
11-17-2006, 01:52 PM
Breaking news: Mets, Cubs, Cards, Padres, Giants, Athletics, Brewers, Rangers, Astros, Tigers, Indians and fifteen other MLB teams are believed to have interest in acquiring Jon Garland for a prospects, a journeyman veteran middle reliever and a backup middle infielder.

:kukoo:

CLR01
11-17-2006, 01:54 PM
Breaking news: Mets, Cubs, Cards, Padres, Giants, Athletics, Brewers, Rangers, Astros, Tigers, Indians and fifteen other MLB teams are believed to have interest in acquiring Jon Garland for a prospects, a journeyman veteran middle reliever and a backup middle infielder.



Not the White Sox? :(:

sullythered
11-17-2006, 02:00 PM
Not the White Sox? :(:

Probably not, if you listen to Levineline.

voodoochile
11-17-2006, 02:01 PM
Not the White Sox? :(:

Pablo Ozuna, Thornton and the other Carlos Lee for Jon Garland...

Sounds like a plan and it won't cost the Sox a thing...

Frater Perdurabo
11-17-2006, 02:04 PM
Pablo Ozuna, Thornton and the other Carlos Lee for Jon Garland...

Sounds like a plan and it won't cost the Sox a thing...

Where would he play? The Sox already have six starters. My head is about to explode.
:D:

stacksedwards
11-17-2006, 02:04 PM
Latest news out the winters meetings. Bruce Levine says Kenny Williams has made an offer to acquire the services of the following four men:
http://www.obsessedwithwrestling.com/pictures/ppv/sse90/earthquake.jpg (http://www.obsessedwithwrestling.com/pictures/ppv/sse90/earthquake.jpg)

In exchange Williams will send, Don Cooper and Razor Shines to become managers for Jimmy Snuka and the Red Rooster

These reporters just throw things against the wall and hope something sticks.

spiffie
11-17-2006, 02:16 PM
:bs:
"Throw in" Mark Teixiera? Why would the Rangers be so willing to dump one of the best young power hitters in the game? This is ridiculous. If that deal was offered to the Sox, KW would accept it in half a second. Then either Thome or Konerko would wave bye bye. Either that, or they could spin Teixeira for top prospects. That is a no brainer.

Which is exactly why it is made up BS.
Reading that whole rumor, I think the problem isn't so much BS as that the Teal Police might want to visit the scene. They're pointing out how insanely lopsided a deal of Otsuka, Danks, and Masset for Garcia or Vazquez would be.

spiffie
11-17-2006, 02:25 PM
Trading Contreras who is locked up for 3 years at about $9 million per is about the worst move the Sox could make. As someone said, Contreras is a CY candidate when healthy.

Someone is going to pay V. Padilla $10 million per seaon this off season..... now tell me how Contreras is not a bargain.
Bingo. Garland and Contreras, to my mind, are the only 2 untouchable starters. For the right price to me you can get any of Garcia, Vazquez, Buehrle, or even McCarthy from the Sox. But those last two names, you better be talking something mind-blowing as in Jon Garland for Albert Pujols or Ryan Howard.

mccoydp
11-17-2006, 03:03 PM
!= 'dumping'.

Are you a C/C++ programmer, by chance? :D:

BeviBall!
11-17-2006, 03:23 PM
Reading that whole rumor, I think the problem isn't so much BS as that the Teal Police might want to visit the scene. They're pointing out how insanely lopsided a deal of Otsuka, Danks, and Masset for Garcia or Vazquez would be.

You got it... I'm disappointed it took until the second page for someone to point that out. People are too dependent on teal... but, we all saw what happened when we tried to phase it out.

likeawarlord
11-17-2006, 03:36 PM
:bs:
"Throw in" Mark Teixiera? Why would the Rangers be so willing to dump one of the best young power hitters in the game? This is ridiculous. If that deal was offered to the Sox, KW would accept it in half a second. Then either Thome or Konerko would wave bye bye. Either that, or they could spin Teixeira for top prospects. That is a no brainer.

Which is exactly why it is made up BS.

i believe they were being sarcastic when they made the comment about teixeira.

Saracen
11-17-2006, 05:22 PM
On the radio here in Dallas just now, they were saying this deal would either be for Vazquez or Buehrle. I'd do the Vazquez, not the Buehrle trade, in a heartbeat.

JUribe1989
11-17-2006, 05:33 PM
On the radio here in Dallas just now, they were saying this deal would either be for Vazquez or Buehrle. I'd do the Vazquez, not the Buehrle trade, in a heartbeat.


I would be thrilled if we could get Aki for either Buehrle or Vazquez. How much are they talking about it there on the radio?

jabrch
11-17-2006, 05:53 PM
Other than that Alex Gonzalez story, I like the sound of all the things that Kenny is cooking.

Saracen
11-17-2006, 05:57 PM
I would be thrilled if we could get Aki for either Buehrle or Vazquez. How much are they talking about it there on the radio?
They were talking about it when I got in the car after work, don't know how long it had gone on. Brian Anderson was also mentioned in the deal. The Rangers need a CF. The hosts were saying they'd love to have Buehrle, but what the heck would they do with no closer?

Jjav829
11-17-2006, 06:02 PM
Well, I was figuring our return would probably be a quality middle reliever and a good pitching prospect, so this fits.

Just get them to throw in Rick Bauer so we can make endless 24 references. :bandance:

oeo
11-17-2006, 06:09 PM
Are you a C/C++ programmer, by chance? :D:

Well, I'm majoring in CS. I wouldn't really consider myself a programmer, yet.

mrwag
11-17-2006, 08:45 PM
I think you gotta keep Mark Buehrle. He's home grown, a lefty, and can "pitch". He doesn't rely on overpowering stuff, so he's going to have a long career. He adds a lot to the team, also, with his personality and what-not. I'd keep him outta trade talks, personally...

oeo
11-17-2006, 08:50 PM
I think you gotta keep Mark Buehrle. He's home grown, a lefty, and can "pitch". He doesn't rely on overpowering stuff, so he's going to have a long career. He adds a lot to the team, also, with his personality and what-not. I'd keep him outta trade talks, personally...

Only one, so he's staying.

RadioheadRocks
11-17-2006, 08:53 PM
this would be a hell of a trade for the Sox, especially if it's Javy



This trade is brought to you today by the number 6.

:D:

pauliemyhero14
11-18-2006, 07:56 AM
i was listening to 670 the score and i heard them saying that the whitesox and rangers are close to a deal for uribe and vasquez for michael young and a pitching prospect.

WhiteSoxFan5644
11-18-2006, 08:13 AM
did anyone else hear this??

soltrain21
11-18-2006, 08:15 AM
really?

pauliemyhero14
11-18-2006, 08:17 AM
thats what i heard.... i am wondering would u guys do that trade?

I would in a second.

cbrownson13
11-18-2006, 08:22 AM
Hell yeah. Pull the trigger.

pauliemyhero14
11-18-2006, 08:24 AM
i wish that ervin santana for garcia would happen so we could trade maybe trade him or mcCarthy for crawford too

samram
11-18-2006, 08:37 AM
All I hear is gambling stuff on the online stream.

A. Cavatica
11-18-2006, 08:40 AM
Let's see who the pitching prospect is. If it's someone with a future, I love this deal. If it's a journeyman throw-in, I have to think we're not getting enough of a return.

WhiteSoxFan5644
11-18-2006, 08:41 AM
That's all I heard on the normal radio. Has anyone else heard this? I havent seen it anywere else...

Steelrod
11-18-2006, 08:49 AM
I still believe that Garcia is the one that's gone! Maybe both?

soltrain21
11-18-2006, 08:49 AM
This appears to be false...?

WhiteSoxFan5644
11-18-2006, 08:53 AM
This appears to be false...?
I would think so....

pauliemyhero14
11-18-2006, 08:53 AM
i dont think this is false unless the guys on 670 this morning were high and just wanted to get sox fans hope up. if i its false then i will be pissed cause when i heard that i was really excited that they said it was close to being done.

WhiteSoxFan5644
11-18-2006, 08:54 AM
i dont think this is false unless the guys on 670 this morning were high and just wanted to get sox fans hope up. if i its false then i will be pissed cause when i heard that i was really excited that they said it was close to being done.
Fuuny how knowone else has hear this. Even on anyother website.

samram
11-18-2006, 08:54 AM
i dont think this is false unless the guys on 670 this morning were high and just wanted to get sox fans hope up. if i its false then i will be pissed cause when i heard that i was really excited that they said it was close to being done.

Who said it? Was it on an update or something? If so, they should have another one in about five minutes and we should hear about it.

pauliemyhero14
11-18-2006, 08:55 AM
no it was a one of the shows

CWSpalehoseCWS
11-18-2006, 08:56 AM
I still wouldn't mind if we could land Otsuka (if that's how it's spelled).

I want Mags back
11-18-2006, 10:13 AM
that'd be great, but it seems unlikely

Pierzynski 12
11-18-2006, 10:32 AM
Michael Young.........:bandance:

WhiteSoxFan84
11-18-2006, 10:35 AM
If this trade goes down the way it's being said to go down by paulieinnyc, Javier Vazquez and Juan Uribe for Michael Young, I will consider buying season tickets for the Rangers in 2007. And probably not attend any of the games.

buehrle4cy05
11-18-2006, 11:27 AM
i dont think this is false unless the guys on 670 this morning were high and just wanted to get sox fans hope up. if i its false then i will be pissed cause when i heard that i was really excited that they said it was close to being done.

Gentlemen, I rest my case.:?:

Madvora
11-18-2006, 11:37 AM
Rongey is on right now talking about the Cotts deal. He said they are also going to talk about possible deals too.

Stay tuned. We'll see if he mentions this...

Madvora
11-18-2006, 11:45 AM
Oh no! An Aaron Rowand mention by a caller!

Bulls_Fan
11-18-2006, 12:09 PM
I know i should avoid this rumor section of the board. I opened up the thread with my hopes sky high.

Steelrod
11-18-2006, 01:03 PM
Oh no! An Aaron Rowand mention by a caller!
...not Carlos Lee?

chisoxmike
11-18-2006, 01:14 PM
i was listening to 670 the score and i heard them saying that the whitesox and rangers are close to a deal for uribe and vasquez for michael young and a pitching prospect.


Do it Kenny!

soxinem1
11-18-2006, 01:22 PM
You guys should realize by now that KW's successful trades rarely hit that 'rumored' story line. His always seem to be 'rabbits out of a hat' unless the team he's trading with, ala Bartolo Colon, let it leak out.

As much as I'd like to see Michael Young playing with the White Sox, I'll save my commentary and thoughts until if/when it happens. There is no use in getting one's hopes up, just like that 'White Sox are VERY close to acquiring Alfonso Soriano' bulletin that blared all over CNN and CBS Sportsline in the summer for a few days.

Dan the Man
11-18-2006, 01:23 PM
I find it hard to believe that Uribe and Vazquez, who were painfully mediocre last year, could be traded for Michael Young, a top 5 shortstop. But if this is true, :wired: :wired::wired::wired::wired:

oeo
11-18-2006, 01:23 PM
i was listening to 670 the score and i heard them saying that the whitesox and rangers are close to a deal for uribe and vasquez for michael young and a pitching prospect.

Newly acquired Carlos Vasquez?

It's V-a-Z-q-u-e-z. You'd think we would know this by now...

Chips
11-18-2006, 01:26 PM
i was listening to 670 the score and i heard them saying that the whitesox and rangers are close to a deal for uribe and vasquez for michael young and a pitching prospect.

I have no problem trading Vasquez, that would be one of of the shortest stints anyone spent on a team.

:redneck

Dan the Man
11-18-2006, 01:29 PM
You guys should realize by now that KW's successful trades rarely hit that 'rumored' story line. His always seem to be 'rabbits out of a hat' unless the team he's trading with, ala Bartolo Colon, let it leak out.

As much as I'd like to see Michael Young playing with the White Sox, I'll save my commentary and thoughts until if/when it happens. There is no use in getting one's hopes up, just like that 'White Sox are VERY close to acquiring Alfonso Soriano' bulletin that blared all over CNN and CBS Sportsline in the summer for a few days.

Well said. I was ready to scream when I heard Bruce Levine report that the Sox had Soriano in their fingertips. I was pissed when nothing happened. You can never tell. Like you said, every time KW makes a big move, it is way under the radar. Can anyone honestly tell me their expected the Sox to trade Aaron Rowand, the future HOFer, for Jim Thome. I was absolutely shocked when I heard that. But let's hope this is the real deal.

Chips
11-18-2006, 01:38 PM
Newly acquired Carlos Vasquez?

It's V-a-Z-q-u-e-z. You'd think we would know this by now...


I have no problem trading Vasquez, that would be one of of the shortest stints anyone spent on a team.

:redneck

It seems you beat me to it.

BanditJimmy
11-18-2006, 01:38 PM
This rumor blows.


This as bad as the one yesterday Santana for Garcia.

joebro25
11-18-2006, 01:41 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6185140

Most likely to the Rangers, only name that is stated is John Danks. I don't like a deal for Garland, hes are best SP at this point.

Dan the Man
11-18-2006, 01:46 PM
Basically Garland and Anderson for a minor league pitcher? Bull****. This better not be true. I like to think that Kenny thinks Brian has a future in Chicago. Garland is our most reliable starter at this point. If a trade goes down involving the Sox and Texas, Mike Young better be a part of it.

PushnThaEscalade
11-18-2006, 01:47 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6185140

Most likely to the Rangers, only name that is stated is John Danks. I don't like a deal for Garland, hes are best SP at this point.

In Kenny I Trust. He will get us someone that will help.

Frater Perdurabo
11-18-2006, 01:47 PM
I really need to stay out of the What's the Score forum, specifically because of rumours like this one. It's like a drug that has all the bad side effects of the harder narcotics, with none of the momentary "benefits."
:(:

Pierzynski 12
11-18-2006, 01:48 PM
Rangers can take Anderson.

nodiggity59
11-18-2006, 01:48 PM
If Jon Garland is going to Texas, Michael Young is coming to Chicago. Period. I think the deal is probaly:

Garland and Uribe

Young and Danks, throw in prospect.

Has Young ever lead off before?

chisoxmike
11-18-2006, 01:49 PM
Rangers can take Anderson.

I'm really glad you're not KW.

samram
11-18-2006, 01:49 PM
Basically Garland and Anderson for a minor league pitcher? Bull****. This better not be true. I like to think that Kenny thinks Brian has a future in Chicago. Garland is our most reliable starter at this point. If a trade goes down involving the Sox and Texas, Mike Young better be a part of it.

Well, they would be getting more than one prospect. My problem is they want to get younger and they're going to deal the youngest member of the staff, who they have for two more years at a very good price? Strange.

Chips
11-18-2006, 01:50 PM
I'm really glad you're not KW.

Ditto.

Dan the Man
11-18-2006, 01:53 PM
I really need to stay out of the What's the Score forum, specifically because of rumours like this one. It's like a drug that has all the bad side effects of the harder narcotics, with none of the momentary "benefits."
:(:

Agreed. This section of WSI always gets me riled up. I'll stay out of the rumor threads for a while before I get too mad.

joebro25
11-18-2006, 01:55 PM
I really need to stay out of the What's the Score forum, specifically because of rumours like this one. It's like a drug that has all the bad side effects of the harder narcotics, with none of the momentary "benefits."
:(:

I don't like posting rumors usually but this one definately caught my eye, It's like the second main healine off foxsports' main page and its from Rosenthal who I consider pretty reliable. I just hope that any trade for Garland gets us more than prospects because, as we've seen in the past from the likes of Jeremy Reed and Joe Borchard, minor league success doesnt always translate into major league talent.

Frater Perdurabo
11-18-2006, 01:55 PM
Since we're dealing in speculation over rumors anyway, here's my valuable addition to this thread:

Rosenthal asks General Manager X what rumors he's heard. X replies that he has heard that the Sox-Rangers rumor is heating up, and that Texas has asked for Garland.

If the Sox and Rangers are talking about dealing starting pitching for Michael Young and prospects, of course the Rangers are going to ask for the Sox best pitcher, and a guy who's pitching style (sinker) would best succeed in Arlington!

Just because Jon Daniels asks for Garland doesn't mean KW is going to give him up, unless (hypothetically) KW - based on Don Cooper's expert opinion - has maxed out and won't replicate his 2005/2006 numbers again.

Unless this is the case, I just don't see the Sox dealing Garland unless KW really believes it's going to make the team better.

cbotnyse
11-18-2006, 01:59 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6185140

Edit: whats the score? d'oh.

infohawk
11-18-2006, 01:59 PM
Well, they would be getting more than one prospect. My problem is they want to get younger and they're going to deal the youngest member of the staff, who they have for two more years at a very good price? Strange.
I would read "younger" as "cheaper." Garlands been with the team for six years now. His price is going to continue to increase. In that sense, moving him for a younger starter (McCarthy) while getting a promising minor league pitcher makes some sense. Still, I would think some other players would be involved.

munchman33
11-18-2006, 02:01 PM
Oh please God no. And it's not just losing Garland. It's knowing Vasquez will be in the rotation next year.

munchman33
11-18-2006, 02:02 PM
I'm really glad you're not KW.

I wish he was.

cbotnyse
11-18-2006, 02:03 PM
If Jon Garland is going to Texas, Michael Young is coming to Chicago. Period. I think the deal is probaly:

Garland and Uribe

Young and Danks, throw in prospect.

Has Young ever lead off before?getting Young would be the only way I can tolerate dealing Garland. Even then I wouldnt be so happy about dealing our best pitcher.

soxchick20
11-18-2006, 02:03 PM
NOOOO! This cannot happen.

munchman33
11-18-2006, 02:03 PM
Looks like we are close to dealing with Texas...but its garland that's going. :o:

Pierzynski 12
11-18-2006, 02:04 PM
chisoxmike, you're not KW either. So you have nothing to it.:roflmao:

samram
11-18-2006, 02:05 PM
I would read "younger" as "cheaper." Garlands been with the team for six years now. His price is going to continue to increase. In that sense, moving him for a younger starter (McCarthy) while getting a promising minor league pitcher makes some sense. Still, I would think some other players would be involved.

Yeah, but the price for a guy who's won 35 games over the last two seasons would be way more than the $9.5M or so they owe JG for the next two seasons.

veeter
11-18-2006, 02:10 PM
Trading Garland makes no sense because, aren't we to be built on pitching and defense? He's our best pitcher, and getting better. I hate the attitude, "well, he's going to be really expensive." No ****. You have to pay for good pitching. What are we, the freakin' A's? It'll take me a long time to forgive KW for this one. I don't care if we get Young or not.

veeter
11-18-2006, 02:15 PM
ANd if this has anything to do with Guillen being mad for him not throwing at that hitter, piss on Ozzie. The guy has performed in the post-season and helped the Sox win a title, and you trade him at 26y/o??!!!!! ***!!!!!

CLR01
11-18-2006, 02:18 PM
Just because a different media hack is reporting the same rumor doesn't mean it deserves it's own thread.


:searchfirst:

gr8mexico
11-18-2006, 02:21 PM
Trading Garland makes no sense because, aren't we to be built on pitching and defense? He's our best pitcher, and getting better. I hate the attitude, "well, he's going to be really expensive." No ****. You have to pay for good pitching. What are we, the freakin' A's? It'll take me a long time to forgive KW for this one. I don't care if we get Young or not.
If Kenny make this trade it would be great!!! Garland will make 10MIL next year and Uribe will make 4mil That's a total 14 Mil that could be spend on something else. Michael Young is only do 3.5 mil thats less then Uribe but of course the only way Kenny makes this trade is if The Sox can get Young. The Sox can always trade another starter so they can free up some more money to sign a left hander like Bary Zito. We can dream cant we

CLR01
11-18-2006, 02:23 PM
I'm really glad you're not KW.

Ditto.

I don't know, it might be a fun experience if he was.

Chips
11-18-2006, 02:28 PM
I don't know, it might be a fun experience if he was.

I'm pretty sure we would suck ass.

Ol' No. 2
11-18-2006, 02:28 PM
Yeah, but the price for a guy who's won 35 games over the last two seasons would be way more than the $9.5M or so they owe JG for the next two seasons.They owe JG $22M over the next two years. But compared to what FA pitchers are getting, that's a bargain. JG has won 36 games over the last two years, which is 6 more than Barry Zito.

NardiWasHere
11-18-2006, 02:30 PM
I really don't understand any of this

veeter
11-18-2006, 02:31 PM
If Kenny make this trade it would be great!!! Garland will make 10MIL next year and Uribe will make 4mil That's a total 14 Mil that could be spend on something else. Michael Young is only do 3.5 mil thats less then Uribe but of course the only way Kenny makes this trade is if The Sox can get Young. The Sox can always trade another starter so they can free up some more money to sign a left hander like Bary Zito. We can dream cant weYour logic and grammar make no sense.

samram
11-18-2006, 02:31 PM
They owe JG $22M over the next two years. But compared to what FA pitchers are getting, that's a bargain. JG has won 36 games over the last two years, which is 6 more than Barry Zito.

Yeah, I meant 9.5 a year, but even that would have been low. Doesn't negate the fact that, as you say, he's a bargain.

Ol' No. 2
11-18-2006, 02:32 PM
Your logic and grammar make no sense.Funny how often that goes together.:o:

CLR01
11-18-2006, 02:35 PM
I'm pretty sure we would suck ass.


Still, that doesn't mean it wouldn't be a great time. :smile:

oeo
11-18-2006, 03:35 PM
chisoxmike, you're not KW either. So you have nothing to it.:roflmao:


Who shot who in the what now?

So, Pierzynski 12, who exactly would you like back on the Sox next year? It seems like everyone sucks to you.

kobo
11-18-2006, 03:35 PM
Trading Garland would be a disaster, which is why it won't happen. KW is smarter than that. He wants to win now, he's not going to trade the guy who has been the best pitcher on the team over the last 2 years.

Chips
11-18-2006, 03:52 PM
Who shot who in the what now?

So, Pierzynski 12, who exactly would you like back on the Sox next year? It seems like everyone sucks to you.

Read any of his posts in the game/post game threads this past season and you can see how correct you are.

The guy hates everyone.

Brian26
11-18-2006, 04:09 PM
I was trying to think of a way to broker a deal that would somehow get the Phillies involved. Also, keep in mind that Texas has a huge need for an outfielder because Matthews Jr is gone. Wilkerson could probably play CF, but that leaves a corner outfield spot open.

Here's what I came up with:

Texas receives:
Pat Burrell LF
Javier Vasquez SP
Juan Uribe SS

White Sox receive:
Michael Young SS
Aaron Rowand CF

Phillies receive:
Brian Anderson CF
Akinori Otsuka RP
Propects

nodiggity59
11-18-2006, 04:16 PM
I was trying to think of a way to broker a deal that would somehow get the Phillies involved. Also, keep in mind that Texas has a huge need for an outfielder because Matthews Jr is gone. Wilkerson could probably play CF, but that leaves a corner outfield spot open.

Here's what I came up with:

Texas receives:
Pat Burrell LF
Javier Vasquez SP
Juan Uribe SS

White Sox receive:
Michael Young SS
Aaron Rowand CF

Phillies receive:
Brian Anderson CF
Akinori Otsuka RP
Propects

Any deal where the Sox get Young without sacrificing Garland is a good deal.

JermaineDye05
11-18-2006, 04:16 PM
Aaron is not coming back..

Brian26
11-18-2006, 04:18 PM
If Kenny make this trade it would be great!!! Garland will make 10MIL next year and Uribe will make 4mil That's a total 14 Mil that could be spend on something else. Michael Young is only do 3.5 mil thats less then Uribe but of course the only way Kenny makes this trade is if The Sox can get Young. The Sox can always trade another starter so they can free up some more money to sign a left hander like Bary Zito. We can dream cant we

Forget about fly-ball pitcher Zito, who would get eaten alive at US Cellular. Garland's contract right now is a bargain. I rather spend the money to keep Garland on the team.

The only SP that should be traded is Vasquez.

Brian26
11-18-2006, 04:19 PM
Aaron is not coming back..

And you are basing that on what knowledge?

Chips
11-18-2006, 04:27 PM
And you are basing that on what knowledge?

I hope he is right. :D:

veeter
11-18-2006, 04:32 PM
Any deal where the Sox get Young without sacrificing Garland is a good deal.Amen brother.

MarySwiss
11-18-2006, 04:34 PM
If Kenny make this trade it would be great!!! Garland will make 10MIL next year and Uribe will make 4mil That's a total 14 Mil that could be spend on something else. Michael Young is only do 3.5 mil thats less then Uribe but of course the only way Kenny makes this trade is if The Sox can get Young. The Sox can always trade another starter so they can free up some more money to sign a left hander like Bary Zito. We can dream cant we

Your logic and grammar make no sense.

Funny how often that goes together.:o:

Veeter and No. 2; I fail to see why you guys fail to see the logic. First we get rid of two key players from the 2005 team, so we have an extra $14 million to spend. Then we get Michael Young for 3.5 million. Let's see--$14M minus $3.5M--carry the one--okay, that leaves us $10.5M. But that's all right because we'll just trade another starter--possibly another one of our key 2005 guys--to free up more money, so we can go get Barry Zito. In other words, for just the price of two pitchers and one SS, we land two new players--one pitcher and one SS who is just a couple of years older than the one we have now. :?:

Brian26
11-18-2006, 04:51 PM
I hope he is right. :D:

Why?

CashMan
11-18-2006, 05:08 PM
I was trying to think of a way to broker a deal that would somehow get the Phillies involved. Also, keep in mind that Texas has a huge need for an outfielder because Matthews Jr is gone. Wilkerson could probably play CF, but that leaves a corner outfield spot open.

Here's what I came up with:

Texas receives:
Pat Burrell LF
Javier Vasquez SP
Juan Uribe SS

White Sox receive:
Michael Young SS
Aaron Rowand CF

Phillies receive:
Brian Anderson CF
Akinori Otsuka RP
Propects




Where does Philly come from? Burrell said about a month ago, that he would only waive his no trade clause to go to the Yanks. Do people only pay attention to the White Sox and not baseball news?

ilsox7
11-18-2006, 05:09 PM
Where does Philly come from? Burrell said about a month ago, that he would only waive his no trade clause to go to the Yanks. Do people only pay attention to the White Sox and not baseball news?

Do people believe everything they read in the media? Players, GM's, coaches, etc say things ALL the time whether they mean it or not.

Craig Grebeck
11-18-2006, 05:17 PM
I was trying to think of a way to broker a deal that would somehow get the Phillies involved. Also, keep in mind that Texas has a huge need for an outfielder because Matthews Jr is gone. Wilkerson could probably play CF, but that leaves a corner outfield spot open.

Here's what I came up with:

Texas receives:
Pat Burrell LF
Javier Vasquez SP
Juan Uribe SS

White Sox receive:
Michael Young SS
Aaron Rowand CF

Phillies receive:
Brian Anderson CF
Akinori Otsuka RP
Propects
So we're giving up Vazquez (when his value is at it's absolute lowest), Anderson (likewise) and Uribe (likewise) for Aaron Rowand (Last 2 seasons OPS+ of 93 and 87) and Michael Young (pretty bad fielder {important because our staff is not very good when it comes to defensive independent stats} who has bad home-away splits). Bad idea.

nodiggity59
11-18-2006, 05:22 PM
So we're giving up Vazquez (when his value is at it's absolute lowest), Anderson (likewise) and Uribe (likewise) for Aaron Rowand (Last 2 seasons OPS+ of 93 and 87) and Michael Young (pretty bad fielder {important because our staff is not very good when it comes to defensive independent stats} who has bad home-away splits). Bad idea.


IMO, Vazquez, Uribe, and Anderson are all at their peak value b/c they SUCK. They'll only get worse over the next 2 years. Now, maybe this isn't the right deal, but those guys have bad value cause they're not that good.

Brian26
11-18-2006, 05:24 PM
So we're giving up Vazquez (when his value is at it's absolute lowest), Anderson (likewise) and Uribe (likewise) for Aaron Rowand (Last 2 seasons OPS+ of 93 and 87) and Michael Young (pretty bad fielder {important because our staff is not very good when it comes to defensive independent stats} who has bad home-away splits). Bad idea.

You're assuming Vazquez, Uribe and Anderson are all going to improve. That's not guaranteed.

One starting pitcher has to go. It's really a salary dump to get McCarthy into the rotation (comparable talent and numbers to Vazquez, but at a cheaper price). I hope it's Vazquez over Garland. So in return for Vazquez, you get an offensive upgrade in Michael Young (who can hit 2nd in the order and move Iguchi down to 6 where he belongs). Trading Uribe to Texas is simply to get rid of him since he has nowhere else to play. You're not going to keep him as a reserve infielder at his price, and the Phillies don't need him.

Texas needs an outfielder (preferably a CF, but could be a corner guy). Rowand, Anderson or Podsednik could fill that bill. I'm thinking of a way to get Rowand back as the CF on the Sox, because I'm not sold on BA ever hitting major league pitching.

Craig Grebeck
11-18-2006, 05:27 PM
You're assuming Vazquez, Uribe and Anderson are all going to improve. That's not guaranteed.

One starting pitcher has to go. It's really a salary dump to get McCarthy into the rotation (comparable talent and numbers to Vazquez, but at a cheaper price). I hope it's Vazquez over Garland. So in return for Vazquez, you get an offensive upgrade in Michael Young (who can hit 2nd in the order and move Iguchi down to 6 where he belongs). Trading Uribe to Texas is simply to get rid of him since he had nowhere else to play. You're not going to keep him as a reserve infielder at his price, and the Phillies don't need him.

Texas needs an outfielder (preferably a CF, but could be a corner guy). Rowand, Anderson or Podsednik could fill that bill. I'm thinking of a way to get Rowand back as the CF on the Sox, because I'm not sold on BA ever hitting major league pitching.
I'm also not sold on Rowand as an everyday CF. He's had horrible seasons at the plate the last two seasons. I like Mike Young, but I don't want to give up anything more than Freddy.

munchman33
11-18-2006, 05:36 PM
Where does Philly come from? Burrell said about a month ago, that he would only waive his no trade clause to go to the Yanks. Do people only pay attention to the White Sox and not baseball news?

Actually, Burrell and his agent backed off of that. Included Boston first, then he included San Francisco. Now they're saying as long as it's a contender.

Still, I'm not sure Texas qualifies.

Frater Perdurabo
11-18-2006, 06:01 PM
I'm also not sold on Rowand as an everyday CF.

I'm not, either. :?:

The only thing i am sold on is the fact that some folks will give themselves cases of rectal-cranial inversion just to fantastize about bringing back Rowand.

I've concluded that Rowand is the equivalent of Steve Fuller. Both gave their teams some great memories (Rowand's diving catches in Yankee Stadium, Fuller's start in the 44-0 victory over the Dallas Cowboys), but at least Bears fans (unlike the Rowand-obsessed) have enough sense to know that even though the Bears won their only Super Bowl when Fuller was on the team, Fuller was not THE reason they won the Super Bowl. ROWAND IS GONE. GET OVER IT ALREADY.
:rolleyes:

Harry Potter
11-18-2006, 06:29 PM
Say it ain't so...

The White Sox are close to trading right-hander Jon Garland, according to a rival executive, and the Rangers appear to be the most logical fit.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6185140

DaveIsHere
11-18-2006, 06:32 PM
Say it ain't so...

The White Sox are close to trading right-hander Jon Garland, according to a rival executive, and the Rangers appear to be the most logical fit.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6185140

No Offense, but that is old news my man!

Brian26
11-18-2006, 06:33 PM
I'm not, either. :?:

The only thing i am sold on is the fact that some folks will give themselves cases of rectal-cranial inversion just to fantastize about bringing back Rowand.

I've concluded that Rowand is the equivalent of Steve Fuller. Both gave their teams some great memories (Rowand's diving catches in Yankee Stadium, Fuller's start in the 44-0 victory over the Dallas Cowboys), but at least Bears fans (unlike the Rowand-obsessed) have enough sense to know that even though the Bears won their only Super Bowl when Fuller was on the team, Fuller was not THE reason they won the Super Bowl. ROWAND IS GONE. GET OVER IT ALREADY.
:rolleyes:

What I'm hoping is that we avoid another year of the Anderson/Mackowiak CF-platoon disaster that defined the '06 season. Mackowiak cost us several games with his awful defense. Anderson cost us several games with his lack of situational hitting. On top of all of that, it seemed like all of the starting pitchers were constantly distracted by the CF situation. The corner outfielders on both sides seemed bothered in the field by the lack of a CF captain too.

Nobody here is claiming that Rowand won the '05 World Series for the Sox, but you'll have a hard time convincing me that the CF mess in '06 didn't cost the Sox a chance to get into the playoffs.

Brian26
11-18-2006, 06:44 PM
I was trying to think of a way to broker a deal that would somehow get the Phillies involved. Also, keep in mind that Texas has a huge need for an outfielder because Matthews Jr is gone. Wilkerson could probably play CF, but that leaves a corner outfield spot open.

Here's what I came up with:

Texas receives:
Pat Burrell LF
Javier Vasquez SP
Juan Uribe SS

White Sox receive:
Michael Young SS
Aaron Rowand CF

Phillies receive:
Brian Anderson CF
Akinori Otsuka RP
Propects

Another variation on this trade:

Texas Gets:
BA, Vazquez, Uribe

Sox Get:
Michael Young, Rowand, Danks

Phillies Get:
Otsuka

oeo
11-18-2006, 06:46 PM
I'm not, either. :?:

The only thing i am sold on is the fact that some folks will give themselves cases of rectal-cranial inversion just to fantastize about bringing back Rowand.

I've concluded that Rowand is the equivalent of Steve Fuller. Both gave their teams some great memories (Rowand's diving catches in Yankee Stadium, Fuller's start in the 44-0 victory over the Dallas Cowboys), but at least Bears fans (unlike the Rowand-obsessed) have enough sense to know that even though the Bears won their only Super Bowl when Fuller was on the team, Fuller was not THE reason they won the Super Bowl. ROWAND IS GONE. GET OVER IT ALREADY.
:rolleyes:

What some people need to get over is that there is a possibility that Aaron could return. I see no reason to look at a trade for Rowand the same way as any other trade proposal here.

I'm not quite sure if I want him back, BUT I do think he brought an extra "flare" to the clubhouse. His impact on the team was more than how he played on the field, it was what he did off the field as well. And I do remember Orel Herschiser saying at the end of the year that he talked to some anonymous players who said that Rowand and Everett had a big impact in the clubhouse, something they lacked last year.

Rowand brings more than mediocre play to the table. I'll probably get flamed for saying that, but I honestly believe that it's true.

Bill Naharodny
11-18-2006, 07:04 PM
What some people need to get over is that there is a possibility that Aaron could return. I see no reason to look at a trade for Rowand the same way as any other trade proposal here.

I'm not quite sure if I want him back, BUT I do think he brought an extra "flare" to the clubhouse. His impact on the team was more than how he played on the field, it was what he did off the field as well. And I do remember Orel Herschiser saying at the end of the year that he talked to some anonymous players who said that Rowand and Everett had a big impact in the clubhouse, something they lacked last year.

Rowand brings more than mediocre play to the table. I'll probably get flamed for saying that, but I honestly believe that it's true.

This is a good post.

There's a difference between saying: (A) Rowand was THE key to the Sox World Series win in 2005; or (B) the Sox might want Rowand back, at a limited price; or (C) Rowand provides some value to teams as a player and in the clubhouse. There are, I suppose, a few people who believe A. But a lot of the comments I've seen -- both in the press and on this site -- have more to do with B and C. And I don't quite know how it is that so many people on this site seem to know for a fact that B is "impossible" and "C" is "silly." (And I say that as a fan of Anderson.) But, somehow, these folks are armed with clairvoyance about B and super-sized baseball acumen about C.

Their reaction is the same, it seems to me, as it is to those poor souls who mistakenly happen to post a trade idea in Sox Clubhouse instead of What's the Score -- hostile and condescending. But, hey, maybe that's just me.

Dan the Man
11-18-2006, 07:42 PM
Not sure that I want Aaron back, but I have one theory, which I don't know if it has any likelihood. As I was reading some recent posts, I thought that since Aaron is said to be a clubhouse guy, and he and Crede are good buddies, that Aaron coming back might convince Crede to stay whatever Bora$ wants him to do. Just my opinion.

Again, I don't even know if I want Aaron back.

Jjav829
11-18-2006, 07:50 PM
and the Rangers appear to be the most logical fit.

I think that's the key phrase. It's not necessarily going to be the Rangers if Garland is moved. I would prefer to keep Garland, though as I've said before, to me it's all about what each players nets in return. None of our pitchers is Johan Santana and they're all pretty similar. Obviously Garland's age is a big factor, but if the return for Garland is so significantly higher than the return for any other pitcher, then that's probably the deal to make.

If Garland is the one traded, and he goes this early, then I have to think Kenny managed to bring in a pretty good haul. I figured KW would wait until Zito signed and the losers of the Zito sweepstakes started to focus more on trading for pitching. So if KW is indeed on the verge of trading Garland, I would think the trade would include someone like Young or another good major league player.

We'll see what happens. There's always the chance any potential deal falls apart at the last minute.

Daver
11-18-2006, 08:29 PM
What I'm hoping is that we avoid another year of the Anderson/Mackowiak CF-platoon disaster that defined the '06 season. Mackowiak cost us several games with his awful defense. Anderson cost us several games with his lack of situational hitting. On top of all of that, it seemed like all of the starting pitchers were constantly distracted by the CF situation. The corner outfielders on both sides seemed bothered in the field by the lack of a CF captain too.

Nobody here is claiming that Rowand won the '05 World Series for the Sox, but you'll have a hard time convincing me that the CF mess in '06 didn't cost the Sox a chance to get into the playoffs.

People tend to forget that Rowand struggled at the plate his first year, as well as struggling in centerfield, yet was left in there to sink or swim, yet no one here wants to give Brian Anderson the chance to do the same, even though his bat improved over the second half last season, and his defense was never questioned.

Iguana775
11-18-2006, 08:33 PM
People tend to forget that Rowand struggled at the plate his first year, as well as struggling in centerfield, yet was left in there to sink or swim, yet no one here wants to give Brian Anderson the chance to do the same, even though his bat improved over the second half last season, and his defense was never questioned.

Joe Crede also. took him a few years to start to play like most thought he would.

Beautox
11-18-2006, 08:49 PM
People tend to forget that Rowand struggled at the plate his first year, as well as struggling in centerfield, yet was left in there to sink or swim, yet no one here wants to give Brian Anderson the chance to do the same, even though his bat improved over the second half last season, and his defense was never questioned.

Agreed, Brian's upside is Torii, and so far their pro careers are looking strikingly similar, not mirror images by any means but very close. Brian already has the glove and his bat was coming around in the second half. Give the kid time.

Frater Perdurabo
11-18-2006, 09:01 PM
People tend to forget that Rowand struggled at the plate his first year, as well as struggling in centerfield, yet was left in there to sink or swim, yet no one here wants to give Brian Anderson the chance to do the same, even though his bat improved over the second half last season, and his defense was never questioned.

Gospel. Amen.

palehozenychicty
11-18-2006, 10:03 PM
Nobody here is claiming that Rowand won the '05 World Series for the Sox, but you'll have a hard time convincing me that the CF mess in '06 didn't cost the Sox a chance to get into the playoffs.

Indeed.

munchman33
11-18-2006, 10:32 PM
People tend to forget that Rowand struggled at the plate his first year, as well as struggling in centerfield, yet was left in there to sink or swim, yet no one here wants to give Brian Anderson the chance to do the same, even though his bat improved over the second half last season, and his defense was never questioned.

Rowand also got sent down everytime he couldn't produce. And he figured things out down there. Not up here. We don't have that luxury now. There isn't a Carl Everett to go trade for and play in center (thank god, IMO). If Brian is thought of as anything more than a backup heading into next year, we'll have trouble sniffing third place. This division is too good to rely on fringe prospects that couldn't show any significant flash in an entire year. Especially at such a key position.

pearso66
11-18-2006, 10:39 PM
I'd much rather go into the season with Anderson in CF than Rowand. If the Sox get Rowand back, I'd rather him play LF with Anderson in CF and Dye in RF, or Rowand as the 4th OFer. Anderson didn't have a great year offensively, but he basically was a 1st year player. Unfortunately, not every player can be Miguel Cabrera and dominate immediately after coming to the majors. Anderson is far superior to Rowand defensively in CF, and Rowand isn't Babe Ruth at the plate. He himself is an average offensive player. I don't mind trading Vazquez/Garcia and Uribe for Young, as the initial trade suggested, but if Garland and or Anderson are parts of the deal, I hope KW walks away.

DaleJRFan
11-18-2006, 11:57 PM
We can't have an frigign allstar player at every position. Anderson is a good enough player to be the everyday centerfielder. Why is there even a question here???

Andruw Jones / Griffey Jr / etc @ 10+ million a year: 265/35/100

- or -

Brian Anderson @ 450k a year: 265/12/65 and GG defense

PLUS:
Joe Crede's long-term contract
Another shut-down bullpen arm
Keep the aces in the rotation instead of dumping salary for an allstar CF
leadoff hitter and left fielder

buehrle4cy05
11-19-2006, 12:02 AM
We can't have an frigign allstar player at every position. Anderson is a good enough player to be the everyday centerfielder. Why is there even a question here???

Andruw Jones / Griffey Jr / etc @ 10+ million a year: 265/35/100

- or -

Brian Anderson @ 450k a year: 265/12/65 and GG defense

PLUS:
Joe Crede's long-term contract
Another shut-down bullpen arm
Keep the aces in the rotation instead of dumping salary for an allstar CF
leadoff hitter and left fielder

I'm with you. Yes, it would be nice to have Andruw Jones in center, but do we really need him? No. We can manage with Dye/Thome/Konerko/Crede at the core of the lineup. He isn't worth it at the expense of the areas where we really need improvement, like middle relief and leadoff. Now, if we can get both those holes filled and still get Jones, I'm all for it.

munchman33
11-19-2006, 12:34 AM
Anderson is a good enough player to be the everyday centerfielder.

See, this is where you're way off base. Anderson had an entire year to prove this true, and he couldn't. He had his chance. It's time to move on. If he goes down to AAA and shows something, maybe give him another shot someday if you have an opening. But he's not given any reason to think he's anything but a late-inning defensive replacement on an NL ballclub.

munchman33
11-19-2006, 12:36 AM
I'm with you. Yes, it would be nice to have Andruw Jones in center, but do we really need him? No. We can manage with Dye/Thome/Konerko/Crede at the core of the lineup. He isn't worth it at the expense of the areas where we really need improvement, like middle relief and leadoff. Now, if we can get both those holes filled and still get Jones, I'm all for it.

That same core with Anderson as an automatic out was good enough for third place last year. And Crede and Dye were probably looking at career years.

This division is too good to be giving automatic outs. Not even Kansas City is doing that.

DaleJRFan
11-19-2006, 12:40 AM
See, this is where you're way off base. Anderson had an entire year to prove this true, and he couldn't. He had his chance. It's time to move on. If he goes down to AAA and shows something, maybe give him another shot someday if you have an opening. But he's not given any reason to think he's anything but a late-inning defensive replacement on an NL ballclub.

Way off base? Anderson didn't have a chance. He'd have a 3 or 4 game hitting streak, would go 2-4, lift his average 10 points in a few days time, only to have Ozzie break his confidence by throwing Mackowiak in CF for a week straight and he'd go cold. There was a specific game Ozzie benched Anderson because Jeremy Bonderman was pitching. Ozzie's reasoning? "Brian has a tough time with Bonderman..." He's never even faced Bonderman. BA's problem in 06 was his inconsistant playing time and the way he was handled. No ML rookie is going to learn the game or how to stay focused sittig on the bench 3 days a week only getting 350 atbats.

If Ozzie doesn't want a rookie in CF, then trade him and get it over already.

DaleJRFan
11-19-2006, 12:54 AM
This division is too good to be giving automatic outs. Not even Kansas City is doing that.

There were plenty of regular position players in the AL Central this season that are "just as bad" offensively as Brian Anderson, here's a few (all hit 255 or lower with 300+ ABs):

John Buck
Aaron Boone
Jhonny Peralta
Rondell White

Yea, hitting 226 isn't good, especially in a competitive division like the AL Central. Keep in mind, BA hit 313 in July and 296 in August.

Other ALC notables:
Brandon Inge - .253 w/ 128 Ks
Curtis Granderson - .260 w/ 174 Ks
Craig Monroe - .255 w/ 126 Ks

Why did these guys play everyday? Monroe's power, Granderson's speed (or Detriot's lack of an alternative), Inge's defense.. and so on.

But, why was the AL Central so competitive?? Pitching. Why did the Sox finish in third place? Every starting pitcher having an ERA over 4, a leaky bullpen, shoddy defense (centerfield anyone??)... and NOT because Brian Anderson hit 226. Remember when BA was playing every day and hit .152??? The sox were winning those games.

munchman33
11-19-2006, 01:08 AM
Way off base? Anderson didn't have a chance. He'd have a 3 or 4 game hitting streak, would go 2-4, lift his average 10 points in a few days time, only to have Ozzie break his confidence by throwing Mackowiak in CF for a week straight and he'd go cold. There was a specific game Ozzie benched Anderson because Jeremy Bonderman was pitching. Ozzie's reasoning? "Brian has a tough time with Bonderman..." He's never even faced Bonderman. BA's problem in 06 was his inconsistant playing time and the way he was handled. No ML rookie is going to learn the game or how to stay focused sittig on the bench 3 days a week only getting 350 atbats.

If Ozzie doesn't want a rookie in CF, then trade him and get it over already.

Ozzie didn't want to play him because he was giving up outs without trying. He wasn't making adjustments. He wasn't going with pitches. He wasn't working counts. He was just going up there and taking his outs. But Ozzie couldn't say that at the time. So he made something up hoping it would be a non-issue.

munchman33
11-19-2006, 01:13 AM
John Buck
Aaron Boone
Jhonny Peralta
Rondell White


Is this serious?

Both Aaron Boone and Rondell White are out of starting jobs because they were Brian Anderson bad last year. They're only still around because of contracts.

John Buck is a catcher. Lots of them hit .220.

Peralta proved he could hit already the year before. But Cleveland is still planning on signing another shortstop, and making Peralta at the very least earn the job. And he's only getting that opportunity because he had such an outstanding year the previous year. Anderson doesn't have anything like that. Anderson's AAA numbers don't even sniff Peralta's 2005 MLB numbers.

DaleJRFan
11-19-2006, 01:17 AM
Ozzie didn't want to play him because he was giving up outs without trying. He wasn't making adjustments. He wasn't going with pitches. He wasn't working counts. He was just going up there and taking his outs. But Ozzie couldn't say that at the time. So he made something up hoping it would be a non-issue.

...which is why after struggling for two months, he went on to hit 313 in July and 296 in August - because he made adjustments, learned to wait for his pitch... How many games were lost when the game winning run would score on balls going over Mackowiak's head or between Mackowiak's legs or dropping in front of Mackowiak?

If you are going to place blame on a 2006 ChiSox outfielder, how about starting with Scott Podsednik... not only was he awful in the field, a poor baserunner, a bad bunter, he also proved to not be able to hit, either. Getting picked off and caught stealing half the time he was on base should effectively drop his on base percentage in half.

Look, there is no right or wrong answer. Just two differing opinions on the CF situation. Your's is to cut your losses and find another CF... I say give the kid time. He has the skills, let him learn how to play at the MLB level, by doing exactly that. The moment he is sent out of town, we can all predict what will happen. This isn't Jeremy Reed we're talking about.

pearso66
11-19-2006, 01:24 AM
Is this serious?

Both Aaron Boone and Rondell White are out of starting jobs because they were Brian Anderson bad last year. They're only still around because of contracts.

John Buck is a catcher. Lots of them hit .220.

Peralta proved he could hit already the year before. But Cleveland is still planning on signing another shortstop, and making Peralta at the very least earn the job. And he's only getting that opportunity because he had such an outstanding year the previous year. Anderson doesn't have anything like that. Anderson's AAA numbers don't even sniff Peralta's 2005 MLB numbers.

Ron"DL" White and Boone are out of starting jobs because they are aging veterans who have had an injury plagued last few years, nor have been very good. Anderson has played 1 full season in the majors.

As for Buck beign allowed to hit .220 because he's a catcher. That sounds like an excuse, you originally said no team in the AL Central can have an automatic out, and not even the Royals have that, and then you switch and say it's ok because Buck is a catcher?

I'll take my chances with Anderson improving next year than create holes elsewhere because Ozzie wasn't willing to give BA a shot. As someone mentioned, he never had a chance to prove himself, because whenever he started to do something, he was immediately pulled from the starting lineup. He was put in the position to fail, and well apparently he did. It sounds like there are a lot of people already writing him off.

Brian26
11-19-2006, 01:31 AM
...which is why after struggling for two months, he went on to hit 313 in July and 296 in August - because he made adjustments, learned to wait for his pitch...

But then he went on to hit .200 in September (13 hits/65 AB)

Flight #24
11-19-2006, 01:41 AM
But then he went on to hit .200 in September (13 hits/65 AB)

No coincidence that this was when he was being yo-yo'd in and out of the lineup and publicly called out by his manager despite having just come off of 2 extremely productive months. Many would have said (and did) that was the time to both praise him and play him every day even if he hit another slump. Not Ozzie though.

If there's something going on behind the scenes, fine. If he got an attitude or something, I could understand it. But based on his play in the field, it pretty much went exactly as one should have expected: struggled early, adjusted and began to perform. Where it fell apart was down the stretch and it's a chicken & egg argument: did he struggle and then get benched or was he benched and did he then struggle? IIRC, it was a lot more of the latter than the former in terms of which came first.

DaleJRFan
11-19-2006, 01:45 AM
But then he went on to hit .200 in September (13 hits/65 AB)

what's your point?

Juan Uribe in September: .200 - 16 hits / 80 ABs
Jermaine Dye in September: .256 - 23 hits / 93 ABs
Joe Crede in September: .179 - 14 hits in 78 ABs
Jim Thome in September: .256 - 20 hits in 78 ABs

These gus aren't rookies. These guys don't make league minimum. These weren't the guys coming out of spring training with Ozzie saying "Anything he does at the plate is a bonus."

No one hit in September when the division was in striking distance.

Brian26
11-19-2006, 01:56 AM
what's your point?

Juan Uribe in September: .200 - 16 hits / 80 ABs
Jermaine Dye in September: .256 - 23 hits / 93 ABs
Joe Crede in September: .179 - 14 hits in 78 ABs
Jim Thome in September: .256 - 20 hits in 78 ABs

These gus aren't rookies. These guys don't make league minimum. These weren't the guys coming out of spring training with Ozzie saying "Anything he does at the plate is a bonus."

No one hit in September when the division was in striking distance.

My point is that people are claiming that Anderson improved in the 2nd half dramatically, yet they are conveniently leaving out the September average when they mention the July/August improvement. There were some at-bats in September by BA that looked awful, like he was completely lost at the plate. Why did he regress at the plate?

You mentioned Crede batted .179 in September. That's one month. Anderson batted at .200 or below for four months (.161 April, .167 May, .196 June, .200 Sept). That's two thirds of the season. Crede batted .313, .294,.284, .281, .327, and then .179. I'll take that (.283 season average) any day.

JUribe1989
11-19-2006, 08:03 AM
My point is that people are claiming that Anderson improved in the 2nd half dramatically, yet they are conveniently leaving out the September average when they mention the July/August improvement. There were some at-bats in September by BA that looked awful, like he was completely lost at the plate. Why did he regress at the plate?

You mentioned Crede batted .179 in September. That's one month. Anderson batted at .200 or below for four months (.161 April, .167 May, .196 June, .200 Sept). That's two thirds of the season. Crede batted .313, .294,.284, .281, .327, and then .179. I'll take that (.283 season average) any day.

I don't understand where the BA love came from in the first place. Sweeney and Owens swings looked better in those 2 weeks they played than Anderson's did during the entire season. You can't even blame Ozzie for putting in Mackowiak instead of Anderson down the stretch, because a lot of the time we just weren't hitting, and Anderson was nowhere near in position to provide us with some hitting. IMO, Anderson is a mediocre to poor hitter and he will never be anything above that. I hope I'm wrong, but until I am there shouldn't be any guaranteed spot for Brian in this lineup.

Frater Perdurabo
11-19-2006, 08:06 AM
You mentioned Crede batted .179 in September. That's one month. Anderson batted at .200 or below for four months (.161 April, .167 May, .196 June, .200 Sept). That's two thirds of the season. Crede batted .313, .294,.284, .281, .327, and then .179. I'll take that (.283 season average) any day.

And thank goodness the Sox were patient with Joe Crede, who's fielding always was excellent even though his bat was inconsistent.

That patient, long-term investment in Crede paid huge dividends in the 2005 postseaon and in 2006.

Now we're willing to write off Anderson after one year? A year in which he was randomly jerked in and out of the lineup by Ozzie?

:rolleyes:

Frater Perdurabo
11-19-2006, 08:12 AM
I hope I'm wrong, but until I am there shouldn't be any guaranteed spot for Brian in this lineup.

No one is saying to give Anderson a guaranteed spot in the lineup. If in Spring Training Anderson is completely healthy but completely sucks, then of course he doesn't deserve to start.

I have no problem with pursuing Vernon Wells, either, because I have no problem with legimiately upgrading any position as long as it doesn't drastically weaken the Sox elsewhere.

I do have a problem with trying to engineer ridiculous trade proposals just to bring back Rowand - an exceedingly AVERAGE fielder and hitter - as if he's some kind of CF "savior."

:rolleyes:

Tragg
11-19-2006, 08:20 AM
In 5 relatively full seasons, Rowand has had only one year offensively that could be considered better than mediocre.
I'm certainly in the play Anderson camp; but even if I weren't, and I understand the reluctance, Rowand isn't the answer to making us a better team.

KyWhiSoxFan
11-19-2006, 08:30 AM
No coincidence that this was when he was being yo-yo'd in and out of the lineup and publicly called out by his manager despite having just come off of 2 extremely productive months. Many would have said (and did) that was the time to both praise him and play him every day even if he hit another slump. Not Ozzie though.

When you're a professional, you have to be mentally strong. BA had four months of being coddled and protected and handed the centerfield job, but that did not do much for his production. So, by September, Ozzie took another approach. No, that did not work, either. But at some point, the guy has to stand on his own two feet and produce no matter how he was being handled.

Flight #24
11-19-2006, 08:43 AM
When you're a professional, you have to be mentally strong. BA had four months of being coddled and protected and handed the centerfield job, but that did not do much for his production. So, by September, Ozzie took another approach. No, that did not work, either. But at some point, the guy has to stand on his own two feet and produce no matter how he was being handled.

Exactly what part of batting around .300 while playing stellar D doesn't qualify as "Production"? Your strawman basically says "unless a guy's a stud out of the gate, he shouldn't play". Which would have disqualified Crede, Konerko, and a host of others.

There's a reason why veterans play like veterans and rookies play like rookies. It's because they're learning how to handle situations when they're face with them for the first time, especially in the bigs. Like I said - He did exactly what you'd expect a rookie to do - struggled and then adjusted and performed. He was then jerked around, following which he struggled again.

When you have a young player, you should be trying to make him as comfortable as possible if you want him to succeed. When he finds a role that he's succeeding in, you keep him there unless you have a real need to make a change. Which means when BA was hitting .300, you keep him in playing every day instead of yo-yoing him in & out and making sure that he's uncomfortable and unconfident (not to mention that calling him out publicly when he's actually doing well is a curious choice).

Jurr
11-19-2006, 09:29 AM
Exactly what part of batting around .300 while playing stellar D doesn't qualify as "Production"? Your strawman basically says "unless a guy's a stud out of the gate, he shouldn't play". Which would have disqualified Crede, Konerko, and a host of others.

There's a reason why veterans play like veterans and rookies play like rookies. It's because they're learning how to handle situations when they're face with them for the first time, especially in the bigs. Like I said - He did exactly what you'd expect a rookie to do - struggled and then adjusted and performed. He was then jerked around, following which he struggled again.

When you have a young player, you should be trying to make him as comfortable as possible if you want him to succeed. When he finds a role that he's succeeding in, you keep him there unless you have a real need to make a change. Which means when BA was hitting .300, you keep him in playing every day instead of yo-yoing him in & out and making sure that he's uncomfortable and unconfident (not to mention that calling him out publicly when he's actually doing well is a curious choice).
Man, I couldn't have said it better, myself. Preach on, brotha!!!!!!!!!

Martinigirl
11-19-2006, 09:40 AM
See, this is where you're way off base. Anderson had an entire year to prove this true, and he couldn't. He had his chance. It's time to move on. If he goes down to AAA and shows something, maybe give him another shot someday if you have an opening. But he's not given any reason to think he's anything but a late-inning defensive replacement on an NL ballclub.

That is where you are wrong. He didn't have a whole year, he was being platooned with Rob Mackowiak.

And I would hate to see where our team would be if we threw away every player that didn't set the world on fire their first year. Crede took a while to get where he needed to be, it took Garland a few years to meet everyones expectations and Ventura had a horrible slum his first year....

Back to the subject of the thread. The rumor of Garland to Texas was mentioned on last night's CBS news. And since I think my dog has better knowledge of the Sox than their sports department, I am now confident this trade with never happen.

pearso66
11-19-2006, 11:24 AM
When you're a professional, you have to be mentally strong. BA had four months of being coddled and protected and handed the centerfield job, but that did not do much for his production. So, by September, Ozzie took another approach. No, that did not work, either. But at some point, the guy has to stand on his own two feet and produce no matter how he was being handled.

I don't know in what world he was coddled. He was being jerked in and out of the lineup all season long. It's not like he was handed the starting role for 4 months, he had 2 big hits opening day, and was immediately benched for 2 straight games. He played 3 days a week for most of the season, then Ozzie started playing him more in the summer months, and he started hitting, and then Ozzie started playing him 3 days a week again.

CLR01
11-19-2006, 11:58 AM
What some people need to get over is that there is a possibility that Aaron could return.

And an asteroid could lodge itself in my ass sometime over the next few million years. Just because something can happen doesn't mean it is likely or even a wise move.

That same core with Anderson as an automatic out was good enough for third place last year. And Crede and Dye were probably looking at career years.

This division is too good to be giving automatic outs. Not even Kansas City is doing that.


Right and the rookie 9 hitter hitting .230 has everything to do with the Sox finishing in third last year. The inconsistent starting and bullpen pitching was just a side effect.

Someone get that man a shovel.

:bs:

CLR01
11-19-2006, 12:02 PM
I don't understand where the BA love came from in the first place. Sweeney and Owens swings looked better in those 2 weeks they played than Anderson's did during the entire season. You can't even blame Ozzie for putting in Mackowiak instead of Anderson down the stretch, because a lot of the time we just weren't hitting, and Anderson was nowhere near in position to provide us with some hitting. IMO, Anderson is a mediocre to poor hitter and he will never be anything above that. I hope I'm wrong, but until I am there shouldn't be any guaranteed spot for Brian in this lineup.


Say's Uribe's biggest fan....

INSox56
11-19-2006, 12:05 PM
Posted by Rosenthal...I don't really put much into it, just a quick read though.
Speier looks to be going to the Angels...not one of the teams he mentioned in the running for signing him, so who knows how accurate this is.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6185140

CLR01
11-19-2006, 12:06 PM
When you're a professional, you have to be mentally strong. BA had four months of being coddled and protected and handed the centerfield job, but that did not do much for his production. So, by September, Ozzie took another approach. No, that did not work, either. But at some point, the guy has to stand on his own two feet and produce no matter how he was being handled.


4 months of being protected and coddled my ass. The kid was "benched" (or whatever the hell else you want to call it) the second game of the year after going 2-3 with 2 RBI's a double, a walk and a stolen base in the opener. That continued the rest of the year.

Chips
11-19-2006, 12:10 PM
Interesting development (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=81274)

chisoxmike
11-19-2006, 12:11 PM
Wow, above the the mega thread no less. :rolleyes:

CLR01
11-19-2006, 12:16 PM
Wow, above the the mega thread no less. :rolleyes:

Do you expect anything else?

MrX
11-19-2006, 12:38 PM
BA had four months of being coddled and protected :roflmao::roflmao::rolling::rolling:

Domeshot17
11-19-2006, 01:13 PM
The difference between Crede's struggles and Anderson's are vastly different.

You stay patient with Crede because he was an absolute stud in the minor leagues. Anderson was good, but not at the level of Crede in terms of their minor league career. Crede also showed SOMETHING while he was up here besides defense. Struggles aside, you knew you were atleast getting 22 home runs at 65 rbis along with that D, which was fine when you had the likes of Carlos Lee Frank Thomas Magglio and PK. Anderson is in the same Boat now with Thome PK Dye Crede, But he Showed NOTHING beyond being a great defensive CF (although his arm is average). He did not have discipline, his swings looked bad, he showed zero power, and beyond a few months of being a singles hitter, he was terrible.

NOW, would Anderson be a fine 4th OF? YES. Could he be an ok starte? Maybe. But this spring, he needs to earn his job, and not have it handed on a silver platter.

KyWhiSoxFan
11-19-2006, 01:58 PM
I don't know in what world he was coddled. He was being jerked in and out of the lineup all season long. It's not like he was handed the starting role for 4 months, he had 2 big hits opening day, and was immediately benched for 2 straight games. He played 3 days a week for most of the season, then Ozzie started playing him more in the summer months, and he started hitting, and then Ozzie started playing him 3 days a week again.

He played in 134 games. lt's not like he only played 2 or 3 times a week. He had his opportunity, being handed the job when they traded Rowand, and he failed to make the most of the opportunity. When he was taken out, it was in platoon siituations to keep him from having to face tough right handers. His average would have really stunk a whole lot worse if he was in every day against every tough pitcher.

CLR01
11-19-2006, 02:02 PM
He played in 134 games. lt's not like he only played 2 or 3 times a week. He had his opportunity, being handed the job when they traded Rowand, and he failed to make the most of the opportunity. When he was taken out, it was in platoon siituations to keep him from having to face tough right handers. His average would have really stunk a whole lot worse if he was in every day against every tough pitcher.

He played in 134. He started in about 100. That ****er should have done a better job hitting as a defensive replacement. Then he would have had the atbats needed to bat.

pearso66
11-19-2006, 03:06 PM
He played in 134. He started in about 100. That ****er should have done a better job hitting as a defensive replacement. Then he would have had the atbats needed to bat.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who isn't blinded by hatred over a guy who has never been given a chance. All of it seems to be crying to get Rowand back too. If Anderson is going to be replaced, it better be for someone better than Rowand.

Frater Perdurabo
11-19-2006, 03:18 PM
4 months of being protected and coddled my ass. The kid was "benched" (or whatever the hell else you want to call it) the second game of the year after going 2-3 with 2 RBI's a double, a walk and a stolen base in the opener. That continued the rest of the year.

You're wrong. This was part of the plan all along to make sure that Anderson knows that it's his fault if he doesn't get enough ABs!
:kukoo:

rgasser43
11-19-2006, 04:38 PM
Corey McPherrin just said Sox close to dealing him to TX but had no details.

CashMan
11-19-2006, 04:41 PM
Read the other posts about it, and it was a done deal, but 2 other teams just asked about him, the O's and i think Mets.

chisoxmike
11-19-2006, 04:43 PM
:ohno

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-19-2006, 04:44 PM
***!!!!!!!!!!!! Lie?

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-19-2006, 04:50 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/6185140

Get Your facts prioritized first.:angry:

Hitmen77
11-19-2006, 04:53 PM
Why would the Sox trade Garland? IMO, he's the starting pitcher that I have most confident in having a great year in 07.

Yeah, I'm sure he has better trade value than the other pitchers, but what can the Sox acquire that would offset losing Garland?

Frater Perdurabo
11-19-2006, 04:56 PM
I just checked out a Rangers' ESPN message board (http://boards.espn.go.com/boards/mb/mb?sport=mlb&id=tex&tid=197114&lid=24), just to see what some Rangers' fans thought of this rumour.

They don't really care for the rumoured deal of Otsuka (sp?), Danks and Masset, either. They highly value Danks and Masset and one poster there gave this scouting report on them:

Danks-best prospect that the Rangers have. Good command of 3 pitches including a low 90's fastball(91-93), a very good two plane breaking curveball in the mold of Zito's and a very improving changeup. His minor league numbers won't dazzle you, but thats largely because the organization didn't let him throw his curveball very much so that he could work on his other pitches. His changeup is now a very good pitch as well. Very effective against the righties. It appears he put it all together late in the season in his AAA league where in his last 6 starts he had an ERA in the low 2's I believe. Not to mention he was the youngest player in the league.

Masset-a guy who covers the Rangers minor leagues says he might be the the 2nd best prospect the Rangers have, but I wouldn't go that far. He is being groomed as the future closer but he may still start. He has 4 good pitches, mid 90's fastball, curveball, sinker, and cutter. He got a little major league time this year and looked pretty good.

I don't see why any Ranger fan would want to do this trade. The Rangers need to hang onto their young arms, not to mention Garland has had just the one great year, and will be gone 2 years from now anyhow.

I still don't believe KW would trade Garland, but OTOH his value may be at an all-time high, and if KW thinks Garland has peaked and could get maximum value for him now, and that it would help the Sox now and for the long haul, I guess such a rumor is at least plausible, even if not likely.

Martinigirl
11-19-2006, 05:44 PM
I don't see the logic of giving up a proven young pitcher for two minor leaguers with potential. If we are playing to be contenders year in and year out, giving up Garland is not the way to go.

CashMan
11-19-2006, 06:22 PM
I don't see the logic of giving up a proven young pitcher for two minor leaguers with potential. If we are playing to be contenders year in and year out, giving up Garland is not the way to go.



I agree with you 100% and I do not want Garland to go, but what if the team was willing to part with 2 top 5 prospects and a major leaguer? Could you turn that down? Kenny is sitting on top of a mountain right now, he is playing (from what I am reading) 3 teams against each other for Garland, 2 teams for Freddie and 2 teams for Javier. I think he is just seeing what is out there for trade, our problem was the bullpen not the starting pitching last year. What if McCarthy can win 16-18 games?

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-19-2006, 06:25 PM
I agree with you 100% and I do not want Garland to go, but what if the team was willing to part with 2 top 5 prospects and a major leaguer? Could you turn that down? Kenny is sitting on top of a mountain right now, he is playing (from what I am reading) 3 teams against each other for Garland, 2 teams for Freddie and 2 teams for Javier. I think he is just seeing what is out there for trade, our problem was the bullpen not the starting pitching last year. What if McCarthy can win 16-18 games?


1. Our starting pitching wasn't the only thing that sucked
2. Yes, i would turn down 2 prospects and a major leaguer for Garland.

Soxfanspcu11
11-19-2006, 06:35 PM
Umm..................

This trade would suck on sooooooo many levels.

CashMan
11-19-2006, 07:01 PM
1. Our starting pitching wasn't the only thing that sucked
2. Yes, i would turn down 2 prospects and a major leaguer for Garland.


1. I said RPing
2. 2 major league ready Pitchers and a Setup RP? comeon guy!

I am not saying I want the deal to happen, but It would interest me. BTW other than Garlands contract year, what was his ERA and Run Support last year?

russ99
11-19-2006, 07:08 PM
Interesting.

If the Sox could get a huge return, I'd understand trading two of the (over 4.00 ERA) starters, but isn't that just giving the Sox that old "Who's the #5 Starter" problem all over again?

goon
11-19-2006, 07:13 PM
1. I said RPing
2. 2 major league ready Pitchers and a Setup RP? comeon guy!

I am not saying I want the deal to happen, but It would interest me. BTW other than Garlands contract year, what was his ERA and Run Support last year?


his ERA was inflated because of a terrible april and he started off a bit cold in may as well.

his run support is always high because he is a 4-5 starter, hence the sox are batting against a pretty ****ty pitcher.

i'm not so desperate for the sox to trade an established sinkerball pitcher, considering where the sox play.

there goes that arguement.

soxtalker
11-19-2006, 07:22 PM
I agree with you 100% and I do not want Garland to go, but what if the team was willing to part with 2 top 5 prospects and a major leaguer? Could you turn that down? Kenny is sitting on top of a mountain right now, he is playing (from what I am reading) 3 teams against each other for Garland, 2 teams for Freddie and 2 teams for Javier. I think he is just seeing what is out there for trade, our problem was the bullpen not the starting pitching last year. What if McCarthy can win 16-18 games?

Also, put this together with the Cubs trade, maybe KW is quite interested in acquiring top-notch prospects. He may be looking at the problem he's going to have in a year. As good as the pitching staff looks now, they will all be nearing the ends of their contracts and getting older. He may not want to trade Garland, but if Texas or some other team wants him bad enough to pay this much, it's worth listening.

CashMan
11-19-2006, 07:27 PM
his ERA was inflated because of a terrible april and he started off a bit cold in may as well.

his run support is always high because he is a 4-5 starter, hence the sox are batting against a pretty ****ty pitcher.

i'm not so desperate for the sox to trade an established sinkerball pitcher, considering where the sox play.

there goes that arguement.


I guess, but now you are pulling the old Dave Weinstedt, Ahhhh If we take the 3 interceptions and the 6 sacks the defense had and we had another quarter to play, we would of won the game. After the 1st day of the season, the #1s usually dont matchup against each other a lot. So Garland might of been facing a lot of #1 or #2 guys.


there goes that arguement

CashMan
11-19-2006, 07:29 PM
Also, put this together with the Cubs trade, maybe KW is quite interested in acquiring top-notch prospects. He may be looking at the problem he's going to have in a year. As good as the pitching staff looks now, they will all be nearing the ends of their contracts and getting older. He may not want to trade Garland, but if Texas or some other team wants him bad enough to pay this much, it's worth listening.


Great point! I mean right now we have 1-2 prospects that could be on a MLB roster in Stewart(if he wins the backup job), Fields (who after the Winter league thing wont be on the roster), and then there is Sweeney who needs about 1/2-1 full year in the minors before he comes up. If we could aquire 2-3 more major league ready prospects, we would be looking at a good minor league system.

Lip Man 1
11-19-2006, 07:48 PM
Which the Sox could then deal for quality major league players.

Lip