PDA

View Full Version : Possible deals for Chone Figgins


caulfield12
11-22-2006, 08:02 PM
That are being rumored around baseball with the Matthews acquisition inked....

Crede for LHP Saunders and Figgins
Crede for Figgins and Scott Shields

Of course, the obviously downside is Josh Fields MIGHT not be ready for the pressure of playing 3B as a rookie for a team competing for the World Series. That pressure ate up Borchard and Kip Wells, to name a couple.

Saunders would give us even more insurance for the rotation....allowing us to conceivably trade two starters, get younger and cheaper in the rotation with hopefully comparable results and fix the holes at SS, CF/3B (Figgins could back up Fields and Anderson, PR and split time with Pods as well) and LF. It would be neat to see Pods and Figgins in the same order (a little like the oft-discussed Crawford and Pierre pairings)...and they would serve as "insurance" for each other. Not to mention that both have very reasonable contracts.

IF we get Shields back, then our bullpen is pretty much set, and we could always get one more LOOGY back if we traded a starter as anticipated.

Or we could take the best between Brandon Wood and Eric Aybar to take over for Uribe at SS eventually and pair that with either Shields, Saunders or Figgins potentially. In this last scenario, we'd have to give up another piece along the lines of Lance Broadway or Charles Haeger.

By the way, Figgins will be a "young" 28 when the season starts, the prime years for a baseball player are around the corner. Imagine the pressure Figgins and Pods could put on other teams?

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-22-2006, 08:06 PM
That are being rumored around baseball with the Matthews acquisition inked....

Crede for LHP Saunders and Figgins
Crede for Figgins and Scott Shields

Of course, the obviously downside is Josh Fields MIGHT not be ready for the pressure of playing 3B as a rookie for a team competing for the World Series. That pressure ate up Borchard and Kip Wells, to name a couple.

Saunders would give us even more insurance for the rotation....allowing us to conceivably trade two starters, get younger and cheaper in the rotation with hopefully comparable results and fix the holes at SS, CF/3B (Figgins could back up Fields and Anderson, PR and split time with Pods as well) and LF. It would be neat to see Pods and Figgins in the same order (a little like the oft-discussed Crawford and Pierre pairings)...and they would serve as "insurance" for each other. Not to mention that both have very reasonable contracts.

IF we get Shields back, then our bullpen is pretty much set, and we could always get one more LOOGY back if we traded a starter as anticipated.

Or we could take the best between Brandon Wood and Eric Aybar to take over for Uribe at SS eventually and pair that with either Shields, Saunders or Figgins potentially. In this last scenario, we'd have to give up another piece along the lines of Lance Broadway or Charles Haeger.
In an utopian society, yes, i would accept either trade stated above, since we have an aspiring 3B already. But then again, rookies are always a gamble.

caulfield12
11-22-2006, 08:09 PM
I don't know why, I like it, it's an obvious move, Pierre and Roberts are bigtime overvalued, Figgins is 28, he's coming off a down year so we "buy low" by acquiring him right now hoping he'll return to norm.

Just the power of the middle of our line-up with two speedsters...and you never know, Anderson and Uribe (Wood/Aybar) would make things exciting as well.

And Saunders as a LHP could replace Buehrle.

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-22-2006, 08:12 PM
I don't know why, I like it, it's an obvious move, Pierre and Roberts are bigtime overvalued, Figgins is 28, he's coming off a down year so we "buy low" by acquiring him right now hoping he'll return to norm.

Just the power of the middle of our line-up with two speedsters...and you never know, Anderson and Uribe (Wood/Aybar) would make things exciting as well.

And Saunders as a LHP could replace Buehrle.

I doubt Saunders will replace Buerhle, only because Ozzie has faith in Buerhle. But i agree with you 100% that this would be an excellent move, without breaking the bank.

oeo
11-22-2006, 08:14 PM
That are being rumored around baseball with the Matthews acquisition inked....

Crede for LHP Saunders and Figgins
Crede for Figgins and Scott Shields

Of course, the obviously downside is Josh Fields MIGHT not be ready for the pressure of playing 3B as a rookie for a team competing for the World Series. That pressure ate up Borchard and Kip Wells, to name a couple.

Saunders would give us even more insurance for the rotation....allowing us to conceivably trade two starters, get younger and cheaper in the rotation with hopefully comparable results and fix the holes at SS, CF/3B (Figgins could back up Fields and Anderson, PR and split time with Pods as well) and LF. It would be neat to see Pods and Figgins in the same order (a little like the oft-discussed Crawford and Pierre pairings)...and they would serve as "insurance" for each other. Not to mention that both have very reasonable contracts.

IF we get Shields back, then our bullpen is pretty much set, and we could always get one more LOOGY back if we traded a starter as anticipated.

Or we could take the best between Brandon Wood and Eric Aybar to take over for Uribe at SS eventually and pair that with either Shields, Saunders or Figgins potentially. In this last scenario, we'd have to give up another piece along the lines of Lance Broadway or Charles Haeger.

By the way, Figgins will be a "young" 28 when the season starts, the prime years for a baseball player are around the corner. Imagine the pressure Figgins and Pods could put on other teams?

Why not just keep Crede and re-sign Pods? I think we'd be better off. If we're not going to make a serious upgrade, why make a move at all?

Just say no to Figgins...why is he so overrated around here?

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-22-2006, 08:16 PM
Why not just keep Crede and re-sign Pods? I think we'd be better off.

Because Shields can give us a lift in the bullpen department, or Saunders can add more assurance to the starting rotation.

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-22-2006, 08:17 PM
Just say no to Figgins...why is he so overrated around here?


Kenny's "buy low" attitude, thats why.

oeo
11-22-2006, 08:19 PM
Because Shields can give us a lift in the bullpen department, or Saunders can add more assurance to the starting rotation.

I forgot to mention, no way do I think the Angels give up one of the best bullpen guys in the league. I don't think it matters that they just signed Speier...Shields > Speier.

I'm not a fan of acquiring Figgins, at all.

Kenny's "buy low" attitude, thats why.

IMO, Pods has just as good of chance to repeat is 2005 numbers, as Figgins does to repeat his 2004/2005 numbers. And Pods' 2003 numbers were unreal. He can "buy low" with Pods after last year, as well. Both are risky moves, so this reasoning doesn't work here.

caulfield12
11-22-2006, 08:19 PM
Why not just keep Crede and re-sign Pods? I think we'd be better off. If we're not going to make a serious upgrade, why make a move at all?

Just say no to Figgins...why is he so overrated around here?

Because the odds are 50/50 at best that Pods will not return to terrorizing baseball again. You have two players in similar situations, your odds go up exponentially.

Not trading Crede also subjects the White Sox to the possibility he has a career-ending back injury and we don't get anything in return for him. We have one of our best two farmhands ready to replace him, and Crede is going to get a huge contract the White Sox won't be able to afford after 2008.

And, acquiring Figgins costs the team a lot less than Pierre, Roberts, Crawford, etc.

gr8mexico
11-22-2006, 08:20 PM
I hope the only way the Sox consider sending Crede to the Angels. Is if the Sox get Santana and Figgins. Crede should be an All-Star and Gold Glover for years to come.

caulfield12
11-22-2006, 08:22 PM
I forgot to mention, no way do I think the Angels give up one of the best bullpen guys in the league. I don't think it matters that they just signed Speier...Shields > Speier.

I'm not a fan of acquiring Figgins, at all.

I'll expand to make a "supertrade." Everyone in baseball knows the Angels need another big bat and really wanted Konerko.

Konerko, Fields/Crede and Uribe for Figgins, Shields, Cabrera and Kendry Morales.

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-22-2006, 08:23 PM
I'll expand to make a "supertrade." Everyone in baseball knows the Angels need another big bat and really wanted Konerko.

Konerko, Fields/Crede and Uribe for Figgins, Shields, Cabrera and Kendry Morales.


That is way too extreme, even for my astranged biases

caulfield12
11-22-2006, 08:25 PM
I hope the only way the Sox consider sending Crede to the Angels. Is if the Sox get Santana and Figgins. Crede should be an All-Star and Gold Glover for years to come.


The only way we get Santana and Figgins is trading either Crede or Konerko.

It's going to take more than Josh Fields. Or maybe not. But I'm still not convinced that Joe will be healthy for the next five seasons.

It's a very big risk to hold onto him too long. We learned that lesson with Ginter, Rauch, Corwin Malone, Joe Borchard, Jason Dellaero, Brian West, Jason Stumm, etc. Of course, those were minor leaguers, but is Crede's value to another team ever going to be higher?

That's the tough think about making trades...it takes guts to pull the trigger and send away a Chris Young, Gio Gonzalez...but especially Crede or Konerko.

Everyone expects Garland, Garcia or Vazquez to be dealt.

oeo
11-22-2006, 08:27 PM
Because the odds are 50/50 at best that Pods will not return to terrorizing baseball again. You have two players in similar situations, your odds go up exponentially.

Not trading Crede also subjects the White Sox to the possibility he has a career-ending back injury and we don't get anything in return for him. We have one of our best two farmhands ready to replace him, and Crede is going to get a huge contract the White Sox won't be able to afford after 2008.

And, acquiring Figgins costs the team a lot less than Pierre, Roberts, Crawford, etc.

You also do not get the upgrade from Figgins, like you do from Crawford.

The way I see it, unless we're getting a stud, I'd rather just take a chance on Pods, because you're going to be taking a chance with every other leadoff hitter out there that is on the market. Unless it's a substantial upgrade, I'd rather we not make a change.

caulfield12
11-22-2006, 08:28 PM
That is way too extreme, even for my astranged biases


It would NEVER happen in real life, it's more of a fantasy baseball trade.

But here's the reasoning...

1) Angels love Konerko and need a big bat
2) White Sox don't love Uribe as much and need an upgrade
3) Angels have two SS prospects that will be ready within the year, and both are blocked for two years by Cabrera
4) White Sox desperately need another solid reliever, and Shields is as solid as they come
5) Morales would definitely put up MUCH better numbers than Ross Gload at 1B
6) White Sox need to trade Crede when they can get peak value for him and before he's sidelined by a back injury that turns him into Mark Prior/Kerry Wood (damaged goods)

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-22-2006, 08:30 PM
You also do not get the upgrade from Figgins, like you do from Crawford.

The way I see it, unless we're getting a stud, I'd rather just take a chance on Pods, because you're going to be taking a chance with every other leadoff hitter out there that is on the market. Unless it's a substantial upgrade, I'd rather we not make a change.


Well, u do, in a way. Fig's is 5 years younger than pods, which, in this case has the best oppertunity to repeat the 04'/05' #'s

caulfield12
11-22-2006, 08:30 PM
You also do not get the upgrade from Figgins, like you do from Crawford.

The way I see it, unless we're getting a stud, I'd rather just take a chance on Pods, because you're going to be taking a chance with every other leadoff hitter out there that is on the market. Unless it's a substantial upgrade, I'd rather we not make a change.

But, for the 1,000 time, Crawford's not a natural leadoff hitter.

It's not unlike the Cubs' acquisition of Soriano...it's just not a logical fit to give away Brandon McCarthy for someone who will have more or less the same on-base percentage and 10 more steals.

I can't even put Crawford close to the category of Vernon Wells or Andruw Jones.

caulfield12
11-22-2006, 08:32 PM
Well, u do, in a way. Fig's is 5 years younger than pods, which, in this case has the best oppertunity to repeat the 04'/05' #'s

There's no other player with his level of major league experience in the prime of his career that would be a better fit TODAY and come more affordably than Chone Figgins.

I wouldn't even think of taking a risk on Dave Roberts if I could get Figgins.

Dan the Man
11-22-2006, 08:35 PM
I'll expand to make a "supertrade." Everyone in baseball knows the Angels need another big bat and really wanted Konerko.

Konerko, Fields/Crede and Uribe for Figgins, Shields, Cabrera and Kendry Morales.

NO WAY! Giving up our two of our best players and starting SS for an inconsistent utility man whom we would count on to be a stud even though his career OBP is about .340, Shields, who is great, but might soon to be on the decline as he is 31. We know that most relievers have 3-4 great years tops. Morales may be good, but can't replace Paulie. Cabrera is 32 and is only a minor upgrade over Uribe. Overall, I don't see how this is upgrading. Figgins trade rumors are annoying because he is not an upgrade over Scott!

A. Cavatica
11-22-2006, 08:57 PM
Is Figgins really all that much better than Ozuna? :?:

Beautox
11-22-2006, 09:18 PM
That are being rumored around baseball with the Matthews acquisition inked....

Crede for LHP Saunders and Figgins
Crede for Figgins and Scott Shields

Of course, the obviously downside is Josh Fields MIGHT not be ready for the pressure of playing 3B as a rookie for a team competing for the World Series. That pressure ate up Borchard and Kip Wells, to name a couple.

Saunders would give us even more insurance for the rotation....allowing us to conceivably trade two starters, get younger and cheaper in the rotation with hopefully comparable results and fix the holes at SS, CF/3B (Figgins could back up Fields and Anderson, PR and split time with Pods as well) and LF. It would be neat to see Pods and Figgins in the same order (a little like the oft-discussed Crawford and Pierre pairings)...and they would serve as "insurance" for each other. Not to mention that both have very reasonable contracts.

IF we get Shields back, then our bullpen is pretty much set, and we could always get one more LOOGY back if we traded a starter as anticipated.

Or we could take the best between Brandon Wood and Eric Aybar to take over for Uribe at SS eventually and pair that with either Shields, Saunders or Figgins potentially. In this last scenario, we'd have to give up another piece along the lines of Lance Broadway or Charles Haeger.

By the way, Figgins will be a "young" 28 when the season starts, the prime years for a baseball player are around the corner. Imagine the pressure Figgins and Pods could put on other teams?

No thank you. Leave BA and Ryan well enough alone. Shields is a FA next year(and has said he is going to test the FA market), and Figgins has a bit better defense than pods and is more versatile but still stinks.

As for the pressure pods and figgins could put on teams, they would have to get on base first(.330 & .336 OBP respectively) to do that. I imagine the other teams running on pods and chone all day, thats a scary thought.

Figgins has become the new Pierre.

As for "for a team competing for the World Series." 70% of teams are competing for a World Series title, nearly every team in the NL except the nats and bucs and every AL team except the Drays and Royals and Os.

I'd much rather have Fields at 3B then Chone, also after watching a 14 min interview with him on milb I'm more confident in him.

veeter
11-22-2006, 09:18 PM
Hell, let's trade everybody.

caulfield12
11-22-2006, 09:34 PM
No thank you. Leave BA and Ryan well enough alone. Shields is a FA next year(and has said he is going to test the FA market), and Figgins has a bit better defense than pods and is more versatile but still stinks.

As for the pressure pods and figgins could put on teams, they would have to get on base first(.330 & .336 OBP respectively) to do that. I imagine the other teams running on pods and chone all day, thats a scary thought.

Figgins has become the new Pierre.

As for "for a team competing for the World Series." 70% of teams are competing for a World Series title, nearly every team in the NL except the nats and bucs and every AL team except the Drays and Royals and Os.

I'd much rather have Fields at 3B then Chone, also after watching a 14 min interview with him on milb I'm more confident in him.

Which leaves us with the same basic problem unsolved...hoping the bullpen, starting rotation, Pods, Uribe and Anderson are better while everyone else puts up the same numbers (that's not going to happen with Dye) and doesn't get hurt (another improbability after this past season).

Why do we want Pods then if there other players out there who are younger, better defensively and more versatile. Figgins playing 3B would be like Mackowiak playing CF (thanks, Ozzie), but Ozzie obviously likes these types of players.

Since when is Pablo Ozuna going to get you 50+ steals? When he has 125 attempts?

mccoydp
11-22-2006, 09:50 PM
Why not just keep Crede and re-sign Pods? I think we'd be better off. If we're not going to make a serious upgrade, why make a move at all?

Just say no to Figgins...why is he so overrated around here?

Figginsgroin >> Podsgroin ? :redneck

soxwon
11-22-2006, 09:51 PM
In an utopian society, yes, i would accept either trade stated above, since we have an aspiring 3B already. But then again, rookies are always a gamble.

consider this Crede will be a FA after 07
unless we sign him to a 3-5 year, but since Boras is his agent, it might be best to trade him now.

Beautox
11-22-2006, 10:49 PM
Which leaves us with the same basic problem unsolved...hoping the bullpen, starting rotation, Pods, Uribe and Anderson are better while everyone else puts up the same numbers (that's not going to happen with Dye) and doesn't get hurt (another improbability after this past season).

Why do we want Pods then if there other players out there who are younger, better defensively and more versatile. Figgins playing 3B would be like Mackowiak playing CF (thanks, Ozzie), but Ozzie obviously likes these types of players.

Since when is Pablo Ozuna going to get you 50+ steals? When he has 125 attempts?

Figgins is a Lattereal move, and we don't want pods.

Deal Dye and Uribe for Furcal, Broxton and Elbert, that addresses needs on this club at both the milb and ml level.

Send Pods to the rockies for Juan Morillo(1pitch at 97mph, needs work on secondary pitches and is inconsistent, will be moved to a relief role in the near future), David Patton(BP prospect) and Corey Wimberly 2B(lead off potential and depth as i hear Getz's glove is good enough to move to SS).

Garica to the mets for milledge and humber/pelfry

I firmly believe that Furcal/Anderson/Sweeney/Milledge in '07 could put up 3/4ths of the production of Dye, Uribe and Podsednik in '06; with more SBs, better defense, and for a fraction of the price. Yes there would be growing pains but we would still stay very competitive and set up our future. If the braves could make it work for all those divisional titles and the marlins of '06 with nearly a full roster of rookies could stay competitive and even beat up on the AL east in interleague, i don't think giving two corrner OF spots to rookies with alot of potential that have nothing more to prove at AAA is out of the question.

07 White Sox
SS Furcal S 29 (08/24/77) *under control till 08
2B Iguchi R 31 (12/04/74) *FA after '07
DH Thome L 36 (08/27/70) *under control till 09
1B Konerko R 30 (03/05/76) *under control till 10
3B Crede R 28 (04/26/78) *under control till 08
C Pierzynski L 29 (12/30/76) *under control till 08
CF Anderson R 24 (03/11/82) *under control till 12
RF Sweeney L 21 (02/20/85) *under control till 13
LF Milledge R 21 (04/05/85) *under control till 13

SP
Mark Buehrle L 27 (03/23/79) *FA after '07
Jose Contreras R 34 (12/06/71) *under control till 09
Jon Garland R 27 (09/27/79) *under control till 08
Javy Vazquez R 30 (07/25/76) *under control till 08
Brandon McCarthy R 23 (07/07/83) *under control till 12

BP
Bobby Jenks R 25 (03/14/81) *under control till 11
Mike MacDougal R 29 (03/05/77) *under control till 09
Matt Thornton L 30 (09/15/76) *under control till 10
Jon Broxton R 22 (06/16/84) *under control till 11
David Aardsma R 24 (12/27/81) *under control till 11
Charlie Haeger R 23 (09/19/83) *under control till 13

Bench
Rob Mackowiak L 30 (06/20/76) *under control till 08
Alex Cintron S 27 (12/17/78) *under control till 08
Pablo Ozuna R 32 (08/25/74) *under control till 08
Luis Terreo R 26 (05/18/80) *under control till 11
Back Up C?

Beyond 07
Try to re-sign Mark Buehrle to a 5 year deal similar to Oswalt and if Joe Crede shows that '06 wasn't a career year and stays healthy open the check book and offer him a deal similar to Paul's. Deal another SP(Garland/Vazquez/Contreras) to fill organizational needs and let Broadway/Pelfry/Haeger/McCulloch/Elbert take over for the 5th starter. Possibly move one of our 5 BP arms that all have closing experience and stuff to open up a spot for Perez, Logan, Long, Patton and Morillo. Try to convert Josh Fields to a 2B during '07 to take over for Iguchi in '08.

Ol' No. 2
11-22-2006, 10:56 PM
Just looking at the numbers, it's hard to say Figgins is really and upgrade over Podsednik. .352 OBP in his best year doesn't exactly make me dizzy with anticipation. But what Figgins does bring you is that he can be the Plan B for two positions where we'd need them if we traded Crede. I have no problem with bringing Anderson back for another try, but they need a better Plan B if he starts the season sucking wind again. Figgins provides that. Will Fields be able to step in and play 3B? Who knows, but Figgins is your Plan B there, too.

But this trade doesn't work as a simple Crede for Figgins swap. The Sox need to get more back, but the Angels are not going to include Shields or Saunders. Finding the right players to make this work could be difficult.

caulfield12
11-22-2006, 11:14 PM
Figgins is a Lattereal move, and we don't want pods.

Deal Dye and Uribe for Furcal, Broxton and Elbert, that addresses needs on this club at both the milb and ml level.

Send Pods to the rockies for Juan Morillo(1pitch at 97mph, needs work on secondary pitches and is inconsistent, will be moved to a relief role in the near future), David Patton(BP prospect) and Corey Wimberly 2B(lead off potential and depth as i hear Getz's glove is good enough to move to SS).

Garica to the mets for milledge and humber/pelfry

I firmly believe that Furcal/Anderson/Sweeney/Milledge in '07 could put up 3/4ths of the production of Dye, Uribe and Podsednik in '06; with more SBs, better defense, and for a fraction of the price. Yes there would be growing pains but we would still stay very competitive and set up our future. If the braves could make it work for all those divisional titles and the marlins of '06 with nearly a full roster of rookies could stay competitive and even beat up on the AL east in interleague, i don't think giving two corrner OF spots to rookies with alot of potential that have nothing more to prove at AAA is out of the question.

07 White Sox
SS Furcal S 29 (08/24/77) *under control till 08
2B Iguchi R 31 (12/04/74) *FA after '07
DH Thome L 36 (08/27/70) *under control till 09
1B Konerko R 30 (03/05/76) *under control till 10
3B Crede R 28 (04/26/78) *under control till 08
C Pierzynski L 29 (12/30/76) *under control till 08
CF Anderson R 24 (03/11/82) *under control till 12
RF Sweeney L 21 (02/20/85) *under control till 13
LF Milledge R 21 (04/05/85) *under control till 13

SP
Mark Buehrle L 27 (03/23/79) *FA after '07
Jose Contreras R 34 (12/06/71) *under control till 09
Jon Garland R 27 (09/27/79) *under control till 08
Javy Vazquez R 30 (07/25/76) *under control till 08
Brandon McCarthy R 23 (07/07/83) *under control till 12

BP
Bobby Jenks R 25 (03/14/81) *under control till 11
Mike MacDougal R 29 (03/05/77) *under control till 09
Matt Thornton L 30 (09/15/76) *under control till 10
Jon Broxton R 22 (06/16/84) *under control till 11
David Aardsma R 24 (12/27/81) *under control till 11
Charlie Haeger R 23 (09/19/83) *under control till 13

Bench
Rob Mackowiak L 30 (06/20/76) *under control till 08
Alex Cintron S 27 (12/17/78) *under control till 08
Pablo Ozuna R 32 (08/25/74) *under control till 08
Luis Terreo R 26 (05/18/80) *under control till 11
Back Up C?

Beyond 07
Try to re-sign Mark Buehrle to a 5 year deal similar to Oswalt and if Joe Crede shows that '06 wasn't a career year and stays healthy open the check book and offer him a deal similar to Paul's. Deal another SP(Garland/Vazquez/Contreras) to fill organizational needs and let Broadway/Pelfry/Haeger/McCulloch/Elbert take over for the 5th starter. Possibly move one of our 5 BP arms that all have closing experience and stuff to open up a spot for Perez, Logan, Long, Patton and Morillo. Try to convert Josh Fields to a 2B during '07 to take over for Iguchi in '08.

It's pretty doubtful Chris Getz will ever be a starting MLB shortstop.

KW is not going to make moves to put 2-3 untested (albeit hard-throwing) rookies into the bullpen simultaneously.

We're not in a rebuilding mode to put us in better position to win in 2009, we have to win NOW with the rotation still in place. We're NEVER going to see a Milledge/Sweeney/Anderson outfield before 2008.

Signing Buehrle to a five year deal just doesn't make any sense, and goes against all White Sox pitching contracts (internal/external) since Reinsdorf purchased the team. If someone wants to give Buehrle $55 million for five years (well, then again, they're giving that to Matthews and Pierre, doesn't make it smart decision-making), then he will be out the door before the end of the season for the highest possible return.

Odds are that he will be pitching better than 2006 in what could easily be his last season with the White Sox, making him one of the more attractive mid-season trade targets, or possibly in ST if he won't sign an extension, as they threatened Garland and Contreras with this past March.

buehrle4cy05
11-23-2006, 12:49 AM
If not for the overinflated market, the best option would be to try and sign Crede to an extension. If he doesn't accept it, then look to move him. But with the market the way it is now, Bora$$ will be looking for around $10-$12 million for a player of Crede's calibur, maybe more.

Beautox
11-23-2006, 12:53 AM
It's pretty doubtful Chris Getz will ever be a starting MLB shortstop.

Thats funny because everything I've read about Getz including his days at at the University of Michigan say other wise, Getz has a very good glove, and his plate discipline is great(52BB/47SO). To go along with that great discipline he can steal bases(19SB/6CS), he still needs to develop a bit more pop and hit for more avg, but hes looks to be very fundamentally sound.

KW is not going to make moves to put 2-3 untested (albeit hard-throwing) rookies into the bullpen simultaneously.
Who are these two hard throwing rookies you speak of? David has thrown 63.2IP, 53 of them this year(which no longer makes him a rookie) and looked very, very good coming down the stretch last year. Broxton may only be 22 but he has thrown 90ML innings, 76 this past year to the tune of a 2.59ERA, 97SO/33BB in 76IP, with a 1.23WHIP. The only rookie in the theoretical sox pen next year would be Haeger. Also KW has shown that hes not afraid to start the season or even call a rookie up midseason(jenks/logan)

We're not in a rebuilding mode to put us in better position to win in 2009, we have to win NOW with the rotation still in place. We're NEVER going to see a Milledge/Sweeney/Anderson outfield before 2008.
Putting two rookies in the outfield and one in the pen is not "rebuilding" its called being fiscally responsible and reloading. Milledge and Sweeney have nothing left to prove in the minors, there is a reason they're 21 and at AAA. Our rotation would still be relatively young and under contract till 08 and beyond. At the very very worst lets just say Milledge and Sweeney produce like Anderson last year(.220/.290/.359) thats still an improvement over last with Uribe/Podsednik/Anderson all being automatic outs. Your putting more speed in the line up and a leadoff man infront of Thome, Konerko and Crede.

Signing Buehrle to a five year deal just doesn't make any sense, and goes against all White Sox pitching contracts (internal/external) since Reinsdorf purchased the team. If someone wants to give Buehrle $55 million for five years (well, then again, they're giving that to Matthews and Pierre, doesn't make it smart decision-making), then he will be out the door before the end of the season for the highest possible return.

Odds are that he will be pitching better than 2006 in what could easily be his last season with the White Sox, making him one of the more attractive mid-season trade targets, or possibly in ST if he won't sign an extension, as they threatened Garland and Contreras with this past March.
Sometimes you have to make exceptions to the rule for example giving that contract to Paul. Mark Buehrle certainly warrents that exception, hes one of the faces of the franchise, and looking at his track record i expect him to rebound very well next year, '06 looks similar to '03. Oswalt got 5yrs/73mil, and a 2012 16mil club option and a NTC, i think something around that area is fair for MB and the sox.

oeo
11-23-2006, 01:13 AM
Well, u do, in a way. Fig's is 5 years younger than pods, which, in this case has the best oppertunity to repeat the 04'/05' #'s

Figs?

30-28 = 2, not 5.

Domeshot17
11-23-2006, 01:55 AM
(1) What are you smoking thinking we can get Milledge and Pelfry or Heilman for Freddy. We will be lucky to get 1 of the 3, and Milledge probably doesnt get dealt at all. THE ONLY possibile way that deal goes down if its more like Freddy and Brian for Milledge and Pelfry.

(2) If you deal Crede, you don't get figgins, you get either cabrera or you pry away brandon wood. Brandon Wood will basically be Miguel Tejada in 3 years. Maybe you deal Crede for Wood and Figgins, but unless Wood is involved, forget it.

However, you do explore a Crede trade. Not because of his back, which will be okay, but because of his contract. This market just ruined any chance we have at keeping Crede. Unless he takes a major home town discount, which I doubt he does (atleast not on Boras's dime) you are looking at 5 for 65 for Crede at least, maybe more.

(3) You would be a FOOL to deal Konerko now. Look at this frickin insane market. Gary Matthews and Pierre are making almost as much as Konerko. Konerko looks like a complete steal now.

(4) who cares if we run out a bunch of rookies. If they get the job done and are ready, go for it. I dont care if they are rookies or vets, as long as they get it done. Now you cant run out 3 BA's. But if you get solid production from them, do it.

You want to make a major splash, Crede and Freddy for Arod. I know the yanks want to keep him, but I doubt they could realistically turn that down. Arod moves to short, Fields to 3rd, and Uribe to super utility, with Uribe taking over 3rd if Fields struggles.

Beautox
11-23-2006, 02:20 AM
(1) What are you smoking thinking we can get Milledge and Pelfry or Heilman for Freddy. We will be lucky to get 1 of the 3, and Milledge probably doesnt get dealt at all. THE ONLY possibile way that deal goes down if its more like Freddy and Brian for Milledge and Pelfry.


Milledge much like Kazmir has rubbed the mets brass and clubhouse the wrong way for some reason, his status has dropped, why do you think they signed Alou? they certainly don't need the offense.

If the mets want Garcia in this market they're going to have to pay, its as simple as that. When you consider Gary Shefield who missed a huge portion of '06 with a broken wrist and is 38 years old and off the juice, got 3, yes thats right 3 pitching prospects(to of which would've been top 10), and the fact numerous sources have said KW won't part with one of his starters unless he gets Milledge and Pelfry. I expect that return for an above avg healthy SP who throws 200+IP and has the ability to dominate on the biggest stages.

You may undervalue Garica, but the market certainly doesn't.

Domeshot17
11-23-2006, 02:34 AM
That may be the case, but Garcia's value wont be that high until some of the big sp's on the market start signing. I agree Garcia's value is market inflated, but he isn't worth 2 top prospects from a team until Zito and Schmidt aren't there anymore. I think that is a big reason why K Dubs is waiting. Let the rumors keep getting bigger, and then let the mets miss out on Zito, get desperate and over pay. Would be nice to see Kenny fire 2 bullets, deal Freddy for Pelfry and Lastings, then Crede Vaz and Brian for Arod and Melky. Pelfry and Brandon join the rotation, the payroll is about the same as when all of it started, Sweeney and Melky fight it out for Center, Fields at 3rd, the team would be loaded.

Beautox
11-23-2006, 03:12 AM
That may be the case, but Garcia's value wont be that high until some of the big sp's on the market start signing. I agree Garcia's value is market inflated, but he isn't worth 2 top prospects from a team until Zito and Schmidt aren't there anymore. I think that is a big reason why K Dubs is waiting. Let the rumors keep getting bigger, and then let the mets miss out on Zito, get desperate and over pay.

Agreed :cheers:

Would be nice to see Kenny fire 2 bullets, deal Freddy for Pelfry and Lastings, then Crede Vaz and Brian for Arod and Melky. Pelfry and Brandon join the rotation, the payroll is about the same as when all of it started, Sweeney and Melky fight it out for Center, Fields at 3rd, the team would be loaded.

I wouldn't mind putting Pelfrey into the rotation right away but he was rushed through the minors same with Garza. I would be fine with Broadway + Pelfry starting at Charlotte. Also NYY has already tried Vazquez out, it didn't work, and they have 3OFer all with NTC and Bernie will likely be signed on the cheap again so they would have no use for Brian.

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-23-2006, 07:52 AM
Figs?

30-28 = 2, not 5.
my bad:redface:. For some reason I thought Pods was 33.

jabrch
11-23-2006, 02:06 PM
Crede for LHP Saunders and Figgins
Crede for Figgins and Scott Shields

I sure hope not. We should get much more for a player like Crede. If Anaheim wants him, they better be talking about giving up either Santana, Cabrerra or Wood.

halo
11-23-2006, 08:14 PM
That are being rumored around baseball with the Matthews acquisition inked....

Crede for LHP Saunders and Figgins
Crede for Figgins and Scott Shields

Of course, the obviously downside is Josh Fields MIGHT not be ready for the pressure of playing 3B as a rookie for a team competing for the World Series. That pressure ate up Borchard and Kip Wells, to name a couple.

Saunders would give us even more insurance for the rotation....allowing us to conceivably trade two starters, get younger and cheaper in the rotation with hopefully comparable results and fix the holes at SS, CF/3B (Figgins could back up Fields and Anderson, PR and split time with Pods as well) and LF. It would be neat to see Pods and Figgins in the same order (a little like the oft-discussed Crawford and Pierre pairings)...and they would serve as "insurance" for each other. Not to mention that both have very reasonable contracts.

IF we get Shields back, then our bullpen is pretty much set, and we could always get one more LOOGY back if we traded a starter as anticipated.

Or we could take the best between Brandon Wood and Eric Aybar to take over for Uribe at SS eventually and pair that with either Shields, Saunders or Figgins potentially. In this last scenario, we'd have to give up another piece along the lines of Lance Broadway or Charles Haeger.

By the way, Figgins will be a "young" 28 when the season starts, the prime years for a baseball player are around the corner. Imagine the pressure Figgins and Pods could put on other teams?

the only way we will trade Figgy is just Figgy for Crede, nobody else like Saunders or defintely not Shields. Figgy scores more runs than Crede, that's all that matters.

The Immigrant
11-23-2006, 08:21 PM
the only way we will trade Figgy is just Figgy for Crede, nobody else like Saunders or defintely not Shields. Figgy scores more runs than Crede, that's all that matters.

:dtroll:

Well, I'm glad that's cleared up. Sure we can't give you Konerko and Crede for "Figgy"?

getonbckthr
11-23-2006, 08:22 PM
[/quote]=halo;1419040]the only way we will trade Figgy is just Figgy for Crede, nobody else like Saunders or defintely not Shields. Figgy scores more runs than Crede, that's all that matters.[/quote]
Yes because who cares about driving runs in and stopping the other team from scoring runs by playing unequalled defense.
:dumbass: [quote

caulfield12
11-23-2006, 08:33 PM
the only way we will trade Figgy is just Figgy for Crede, nobody else like Saunders or defintely not Shields. Figgy scores more runs than Crede, that's all that matters.

Ummm...do runs batted in not count?

I guess that's why you are still looking at acquiring Manny Ramirez, Carlos Lee or another big run producer.

Seems we have a standoff, Angels fans think Figgins (who has no position after the acquisition of Matthews Jr., he's universally-acknowledged as somewhere between brutal and adequate at 3B, think Mackowiak, but worse) they could actually get one of the three best young 3B in the game who's actually affordable for the next two seasons...

White Sox fans think Figgins AND Saunders OR Shields isn't enough.

It would be interesting to see if KW would pull the trigger on a Josh Fields for Figgins deal...if it was actually on the table.

esbrechtel
11-23-2006, 08:34 PM
NO WAY!! I hate chone...if chone is playing 3rd next year i will be fuming...THAT IS A HUGE DOWNGRADE! :angry: figgins sucks on defense...and his OBP wasnt even that good last year, plus there was a point last year he didnt even leadoff because of how bad his ave and obp was...TERRIBLE TRADE!!!

caulfield12
11-23-2006, 09:04 PM
Fields for Figgins isn't a bad trade if lock up Crede long-term.

We still keep Sweeney for our "outfield of the future," and Fields isn't a natural OF.

White Sox Randy
11-23-2006, 09:26 PM
1. No way is Josh Fields my 3rd baseman next year. That would be a disaster for the Sox. He would be clearly subpar both defensively and offensively. Offensively, he's probably 3 years away from being Crede and defensively he'll probably be average at best.

2. I would definitely entertain the idea of trading Konerko. I love him but let's face it, he's an excellent hitter with power but can only play first base and is about the slowest player on the bases. If I got a great offer for him, I'd take it.

3. I would probably not trade Crede now but if I did trade him for Figgins and Shields, I would then try to trade for Ensberg and put Figgins in the outfield.

caulfield12
11-23-2006, 09:30 PM
They wanted to dump Ensberg most of last season in Houston. In fact, they're the favorites to get Carlos Lee at this point.

So what makes you so certain that trading for Ensberg would be demonstrably better than playing Fields?

Craig Grebeck
11-24-2006, 01:19 AM
They wanted to dump Ensberg most of last season in Houston. In fact, they're the favorites to get Carlos Lee at this point.

So what makes you so certain that trading for Ensberg would be demonstrably better than playing Fields?
I'm not opposed to Fields, but Ensberg put up a 118 OPS+ last year (in what is widely considered the worst year of his career). Contrast that with Joe's 108. I would be happy to trade Crede.

Step 1: Trade Crede for young SS and RP

Step 2: Buy low on Ensberg and Jason Lane

Ensberg is head and shoulders above Crede offensively, and Lane would be a nice bat for our bench.

Just say no to Chone.

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-24-2006, 07:25 AM
I'm not opposed to Fields, but Ensberg put up a 118 OPS+ last year (in what is widely considered the worst year of his career). Contrast that with Joe's 108. I would be happy to trade Crede.

Step 1: Trade Crede for young SS and RP

Step 2: Buy low on Ensberg and Jason Lane

Ensberg is head and shoulders above Crede offensively, and Lane would be a nice bat for our bench.

Just say no to Chone.
3 Things:

1. Yes, i agree there is better options than that of Chone

2. Ensberg is definitely not "head and shoulders" above Crede offensively. With a career high average around .291, I would say that they could be equal offensively, Crede with more power, but Ensberg with higher OBP. I doubt we can buy low on Ensberg even if the Stros wanted to trade him.

3. Our bench has around the highest batting average of all of baseball, so, why would Williams even considering another bat for the bench?

caulfield12
11-24-2006, 08:20 AM
The other thing nobody is discussing is the fact that Crede is far superior defensively to Ensberg and/or Fields...

It's one thing to play Fields, who came up through the system, but it's quite another to replace Crede and significantly weaken the INF defense.

And are we positive that Ensberg isn't simply declining as a player at this point in his career? He will turn 32 during the 2007 season.

KW says...younger, cheaper, faster and more athletic. This doesn't fit the pattern, unless we get Roy Oswalt back in return.

Craig Grebeck
11-24-2006, 09:13 AM
3 Things:

1. Yes, i agree there is better options than that of Chone

2. Ensberg is definitely not "head and shoulders" above Crede offensively. With a career high average around .291, I would say that they could be equal offensively, Crede with more power, but Ensberg with higher OBP. I doubt we can buy low on Ensberg even if the Stros wanted to trade him.

3. Our bench has around the highest batting average of all of baseball, so, why would Williams even considering another bat for the bench?

1. Thank you for realizing Chone sucks.

2. Ensberg IS head and shoulders above Crede offensively. Who cares about his BA? He gets on base much more. I'd say looking at their SLG%, they're fairly equal. But Ensberg gets the nod because of his extremely good patience.

3. Because our bench lacks natural outfielders?

areilly
11-24-2006, 09:17 AM
Much as I want to see him come to the Sox, I'd be absolutely shocked if the Angels traded Shields.

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-24-2006, 09:27 AM
3. Because our bench lacks natural outfielders?

Hence the word Bench players

Craig Grebeck
11-24-2006, 09:28 AM
Hence the word Bench players
Oh, well I just assumed that we wouldn't trot out natural infielders everytime someone needs a rest. Silly me.

caulfield12
11-24-2006, 09:30 AM
1. Thank you for realizing Chone sucks.

2. Ensberg IS head and shoulders above Crede offensively. Who cares about his BA? He gets on base much more. I'd say looking at their SLG%, they're fairly equal. But Ensberg gets the nod because of his extremely good patience.

3. Because our bench lacks natural outfielders?


1. Like who, besides Carl Crawford? Give me 3 names.

2. The pre last two months of 2005 Crede or the current version? How do you know? Ensberg is leaving the peak years of his career, Crede is just entering that time and has complete confidence in his game finally. I think there's a MUCH higher likelihood Crede repeats last year's numbers for 5 years than either Ensberg or Dye.

3. Yes, we need to find a "natural" back up in CF. Sweeney is a natural RF but could be a very good LF as well.

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-24-2006, 09:39 AM
1. Like who, besides Carl Crawford? Give me 3 names.

2. The pre last two months of 2005 Crede or the current version? How do you know? Ensberg is leaving the peak years of his career, Crede is just entering that time and has complete confidence in his game finally. I think there's a MUCH higher likelihood Crede repeats last year's numbers for 5 years than either Ensberg or Dye.

3. Yes, we need to find a "natural" back up in CF. Sweeney is a natural RF but could be a very good LF as well.

1. I agree its hard to find a good leadoff man
2. Agreed
3. The name is Terrero, Luis Terrero

caulfield12
11-24-2006, 09:46 AM
1. I agree its hard to find a good leadoff man
2. Agreed
3. The name is Terrero, Luis Terrero

Before that, he was Alex Escobar and Julio Ramirez. Terrero is nothing but insurance, and Option #4/5 on the priority list of possible starters for KW.

Craig Grebeck
11-24-2006, 11:38 AM
I think Terrero would make a great backup. Also, Crede will probably ask for 6/60, and he is not worth that when you consider his numbers (not so great) and his back. He is a good player, but there are many other cheap options to consider. He will net some good SP prospects in a trade.

SOXSINCE'70
11-24-2006, 11:48 AM
Crede will probably ask for 6/60, and he is not worth that when you consider his numbers (not so great) and his back. He is a good player.

Gary Matthews Jr. is a "good" player,and look at the payday he just got.

White Sox Randy
11-24-2006, 11:50 AM
Let's face it - our minor leaguers are not going to get us from 3rd place back to winning the AL Central.

The only player with the likelyhood of being anything special is Sweeney and he isn't going to be special in 2007.

We need to go outside of the organization to add some talent. Trade is the only way since KW has obviously decided that he isn't paying for any free agent relief pitchers or outfielders - our 2 biggest weaknesses.

I'm not saying that we should trade Crede, but he will almost certainly be gone after 2008 so when do you trade him ?

Ensberg has proven that he is a good player, is cheap and is available. Although much different players, he has to be considered atleast Crede's equal offensively, he is much better on the bases but a little weaker defensively. His agent isn't BORASS.

Is it possible to get Santana for Crede ?

I'd be more inclined to try Fields at first base. Can we get Santana for Konerko ? Sign Cliff Floyd and platoon him and Fields at first.

If we could get Santana for Konerko, then could we trade him or McCarthy for Carl Crawford ? Thus turning Konerko into Crawford ?

I wish KW would have signed ONE free agent reliever.

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-24-2006, 11:56 AM
Let's face it - our minor leaguers are not going to get us from 3rd place back to winning the AL Central.

The only player with the likelyhood of being anything special is Sweeney and he isn't going to be special in 2007.

We need to go outside of the organization to add some talent. Trade is the only way since KW has obviously decided that he isn't paying for any free agent relief pitchers or outfielders - our 2 biggest weaknesses.

I'm not saying that we should trade Crede, but he will almost certainly be gone after 2008 so when do you trade him ?

Ensberg has proven that he is a good player, is cheap and is available. Although much different players, he has to be considered atleast Crede's equal offensively, he is much better on the bases but a little weaker defensively. His agent isn't BORASS.

Is it possible to get Santana for Crede ?

I'd be more inclined to try Fields at first base. Can we get Santana for Konerko ? Sign Cliff Floyd and platoon him and Fields at first.

If we could get Santana for Konerko, then could we trade him or McCarthy for Carl Crawford ? Thus turning Konerko into Crawford ?

I wish KW would have signed ONE free agent reliever.

To the Angels, Konerko is worth way more than just Santana. I wouldnt be suprised if i see a few of the regular names on the Angels offered a package for Konerko. The thing is, why would we want to get rid of a very well-balanced hitter in all of baseball?

And thanks, I think we all need to come to realization that Boone Logan, Aardsma, or Haeger aren't going to win the Central Division. Thanks for stating that.:cool:

Lip Man 1
11-24-2006, 12:01 PM
Randy:

There are still a boatload of free agent relief pitchers out there for Kenny to sign. Williams' isn't stupid...he learns from his mistakes. He understands what happened to the bullpen last season and I would be amazed if he made the same mistake again.

Lip

Lillian
11-24-2006, 12:32 PM
In response to a couple of different posts here; wouldn't Crede be a great signing if all he wanted was 6 years at $10 million a year? That doesn't sound bad at all, considering the money just paid to Pierre, Mathews and Soriano.
And I agree that Crede would certainly net more than just E. Santana. and so would Konerko. I'd rather have Crede, myself. A great fielding, offensive producer, and clutch hitter at 3rd is harder to replace than a slow power hitting firstbaseman. But someone already said that.

As far as the likelihood of the Angels trading Shields; he as already been mentioned in several trade rumors. He'll be a free agent at the end of this year, and they just signed Speier, so I wouldn't be surprised if they traded him.

White Sox Randy
11-24-2006, 12:34 PM
Randy:

There are still a boatload of free agent relief pitchers out there for Kenny to sign. Williams' isn't stupid...he learns from his mistakes. He understands what happened to the bullpen last season and I would be amazed if he made the same mistake again.

Lip


You would think. I know that you and I were all over him last spring for this but...... I'm still waiting.

And, just signing anyone isn't the idea.

Lillian
11-24-2006, 12:48 PM
To the Angels, Konerko is worth way more than just Santana. I wouldnt be suprised if i see a few of the regular names on the Angels offered a package for Konerko. The thing is, why would we want to get rid of a very well-balanced hitter in all of baseball?

And thanks, I think we all need to come to realization that Boone Logan, Aardsma, or Haeger aren't going to win the Central Division. Thanks for stating that.:cool:

I agree with you on Konerko's value. The Angels, who covet him, would certainly give up more than Santana. I also think that you're right about Konerko being one of the better "well-balanced" hitters in all of baseball.
However, if you could replace some of his offense elsewhere, as some of us have suggested, and add more speed, wouldn't that make sense?
It just comes down to having to give up something to get something.

Regarding the bullpen. I do think that at least one of the youngsters, Logan, Haeger, or maybe even Oneli Perez could fill one spot in the pen. That would leave us with just one more arm to acquire. It shouldn't be too hard to find one more relief pitcher, since we already have a lot of power arms. Off speed relief pitchers are much easier to find, aren't they?
We actually need another offspeed pitcher to make the power arms more effective. It isn't a good idea to have every guy you run out there, throwing in the high 90's. If it were 100, that might work, but Big League hitters will time those high 90's pitches unless there is a "change of pace" mixed in there somewhere.

White Sox Randy
11-24-2006, 01:03 PM
The reason that a club that wants to WIN THE WORLD SERIES needs to begin the season with 6 serious, proven relief pitchers is that inevitably:

one or two will have bad years - see Neal Cotts, see Cliff Politte OR

one or two will get injured - see Dustin Hermanson, Mike MacDougal

If you start playing around with the Boone Logans and Oneli Perez and they aren't ready and another guy or two gets injured or is just bad well then....

you have only 3 reliable bullpen guys and then YOU FINISH IN 3RD PLACE WHEN YOU EXPECTED TO REPEAT AS WORLD CHAMPIONS!

Let's get serious about our bullpen !

White Sox Randy
11-24-2006, 01:06 PM
Now that I think about it, if I could get Santana for Konerko, I would do it.

Then, I would put Thome / Gload at first base and sign Barry Bonds to DH.

That would be interesting.

Ol' No. 2
11-24-2006, 01:07 PM
Now that I think about it, if I could get Santana for Konerko, I would do it.

Then, I would put Thome / Gload at first base and sign Barry Bonds to DH.

That would be interesting.Maybe we can coax Rafael Palmeiro out of retirement, too.

Ixnay.

White Sox Randy
11-24-2006, 01:39 PM
Maybe we can coax Rafael Palmeiro out of retirement, too.

Ixnay.


I wasn't entirely serious but Bonds can still hit and get on base 45 % of the time - that's pretty damn impressive.

Cuck_The_Fubs
11-24-2006, 02:23 PM
Randy:

There are still a boatload of free agent relief pitchers out there for Kenny to sign. Williams' isn't stupid...he learns from his mistakes. He understands what happened to the bullpen last season and I would be amazed if he made the same mistake again.

Lip
Williams' wasn't the one who made the mistake...his players made the mistake

caulfield12
11-24-2006, 04:50 PM
Trading Vizcaino and Marte was not the mistake.

It was not replacing them with one quality veteran reliever. Mike Myers was his target and got away.

We all knew Hermanson wasn't a good bet.

You can't predict both Cotts and Politte are going to go south, nor can you predict that Thornton will emerge...it could have actually been worse than it was without Matt, who was a "project" at best when ST started.

But we should have gone out and spent $2-3 million more on bringing in a quality reliever like Riske...anything to avoid the "tryout" camp of 10-12 journeyman lefties.

And we needed better relievers than Tracey and Montero in the minors.

sullythered
11-24-2006, 05:34 PM
Now that I think about it, if I could get Santana for Konerko, I would do it.

Then, I would put Thome / Gload at first base and sign Barry Bonds to DH.

That would be interesting.
Yeah, that'd be awesome. Then I could stop cheering for the White Sox for the first time in my life, and take up a hobby during the summer. No thanks.

Fred Manrique
11-28-2006, 12:47 PM
Here we go again... as I was driving back to work from lunch ESPN Radio reported that the Angels and Sox are in "serious talks" for the Figgins-Santana for Crede-Garcia.

Who knows what ESPN's "serious talks" consists of.

Tough trade, but with the recent news about it being hard to resign Crede I say we do it.

getonbckthr
11-28-2006, 12:54 PM
Supposedly Mike Murphy will have the Anaheim Beat writer on around 1.

spiffie
11-28-2006, 01:09 PM
The LA Times article about the possibility of a Crede/Garcia for Figgins/Santana trade is here. (http://www.latimes.com/sports/baseball/mlb/angels/la-sp-angels28nov28,1,5477741.story?coll=la-headlines-sports-mlb-angels&ctrack=1&cset=true) One important thing from the article is this quote:
sources said no trade was imminent and other players probably would be included in any deal should negotiations progress

The more I think about this the more I would be in favor of this if the savings on payroll are going to go towards upgrading one of the other lineup spots. Figgins/Santana are going to total about $4 million, while Crede/Garcia will be about $15 million, so that $11 million could be rather useful. Perhaps flipping Santana and prospects to the Yankees for Rodriguez?

Fred Manrique
11-28-2006, 01:10 PM
Supposedly Mike Murphy will have the Anaheim Beat writer on around 1.

Let me know if anything interesting is said...

Sox Fan 35
11-28-2006, 01:12 PM
I am starting to think that trading Crede is a good idea. I still think we can do better than Figgins.

esbrechtel
11-28-2006, 01:29 PM
Yeah, that'd be awesome. Then I could stop cheering for the White Sox for the first time in my life, and take up a hobby during the summer. No thanks.

AMEN!!!! what is this playstation? NO chone blows! and i wouldnt deal konerko...we have a great and proven rotation and with how expensive everything is right now i think id move macarthy for a leadoff hitter and more prospects...

spawn
11-28-2006, 01:47 PM
Now that I think about it, if I could get Santana for Konerko, I would do it.

Then, I would put Thome / Gload at first base and sign Barry Bonds to DH.

That would be interesting.
Dude, seriously...enough with the Barry Bonds love. There's no way KW signs him.

Flight #24
11-28-2006, 02:31 PM
The LA Times article about the possibility of a Crede/Garcia for Figgins/Santana trade is here. (http://www.latimes.com/sports/baseball/mlb/angels/la-sp-angels28nov28,1,5477741.story?coll=la-headlines-sports-mlb-angels&ctrack=1&cset=true) One important thing from the article is this quote:
[quote]sources said no trade was imminent and other players probably would be included in any deal should negotiations progress[/url]

The more I think about this the more I would be in favor of this if the savings on payroll are going to go towards upgrading one of the other lineup spots. Figgins/Santana are going to total about $4 million, while Crede/Garcia will be about $15 million, so that $11 million could be rather useful. Perhaps flipping Santana and prospects to the Yankees for Rodriguez?

That's a HORRIBLE deal for the Sox unless you can turn around and trade one of the veteran SPs for a big bat. $10-11M in savings doesn't buy you a ton in this market, and it especially won't buy you a Crede replacement.

If that becomes Santana+Figgins for ARod, fine. If it becomes Mike Young and Danks/Masset, fine. But any scenario that basically replaces Joe Crede with Chone Figgins without allowing for a significant upgrade elsewhere is a big step backwards.

Now add in Brandon Wood to the deal from the Angels side and you might have something. Fields+Wood on the left side, Figgins in LF and the flexibility to trade Uribe+Figgins/Pods+Vaz for prospects is not too shabby.

VladtheImpaler
11-28-2006, 02:34 PM
Why not just keep Crede and re-sign Pods? I think we'd be better off. If we're not going to make a serious upgrade, why make a move at all?

Just say no to Figgins...why is he so overrated around here?

Because pods sucks

caulfield12
11-28-2006, 02:39 PM
[quote=spiffie;1422984]The LA Times article about the possibility of a Crede/Garcia for Figgins/Santana trade is here. (http://www.latimes.com/sports/baseball/mlb/angels/la-sp-angels28nov28,1,5477741.story?coll=la-headlines-sports-mlb-angels&ctrack=1&cset=true) One important thing from the article is this quote:


That's a HORRIBLE deal for the Sox unless you can turn around and trade one of the veteran SPs for a big bat. $10-11M in savings doesn't buy you a ton in this market, and it especially won't buy you a Crede replacement.

If that becomes Santana+Figgins for ARod, fine. If it becomes Mike Young and Danks/Masset, fine. But any scenario that basically replaces Joe Crede with Chone Figgins without allowing for a significant upgrade elsewhere is a big step backwards.

Now add in Brandon Wood to the deal from the Angels side and you might have something. Fields+Wood on the left side, Figgins in LF and the flexibility to trade Uribe+Figgins/Pods+Vaz for prospects is not too shabby.

You're counting out Josh Fields this year at 3B?

I don't think the Sox would allow Figgins to play 3B more than 15-20 games.

I think Wood is one of the three most coveted SS prospects in the game....they might be tempted to deal Cabrera just to clear a spot for him, but they're not sure if he is ready yet to throw into the fire.

Whoever said we should trade McCarthy isn't thinking logically...the premium, over everything else is in this crazy market, is on starting pitching. Especially YOUNG and potential 1-3 in the rotation starters who are controlled for six years before Free Agency. We could get a corner OF in Crawford but also completely blow up our budget in 2008/09/10 without Brandon...unless we plan to start Haeger or Broadway to keep the rotation's overall price tag down.

Chw2007
11-28-2006, 04:05 PM
i thought this deal was to send crede and garcia to the angels for figgins and erwin santana. but hell with that i'd rather take figgins and shields or joe saunders. shields is one of the elite setup men in this league and the reason the sox fell apart last year in september was cause of that awful bullpen. i think this isn't a bad deal. of course i wouldn't mind the one i mentioned with garcia and santana added to this. what i would really like to see is crede and garcia for shields, santana, and figgins. now that would be an upgrade. garcia is done he has no more velocity, crede's gonna go elsewhere after this year so u better trade him now. plus u gain a younger arm in santana and a leadoff man in figgins who is better than the .260 he hit last year. this trade would be great for the sox. we don't need crede's 30 more hr's thome, pauly, and JD can hit 100 combined. i'd trade crede's 30 hr and his bad back for a speedster like figgins to finnaly replace podsednik. and this will give fields a chance. looking at this trade it sounds real good for us. i hope it's made and not just a stupid rumor.

Chw2007
11-28-2006, 04:08 PM
[quote=Flight #24;1423156]

You're counting out Josh Fields this year at 3B?

I don't think the Sox would allow Figgins to play 3B more than 15-20 games.

I think Wood is one of the three most coveted SS prospects in the game....they might be tempted to deal Cabrera just to clear a spot for him, but they're not sure if he is ready yet to throw into the fire.

Whoever said we should trade McCarthy isn't thinking logically...the premium, over everything else is in this crazy market, is on starting pitching. Especially YOUNG and potential 1-3 in the rotation starters who are controlled for six years before Free Agency. We could get a corner OF in Crawford but also completely blow up our budget in 2008/09/10 without Brandon...unless we plan to start Haeger or Broadway to keep the rotation's overall price tag down.

we're not getting carl crawford, TB is not that stupid maybe rocco baldelli is a possiblity, but he just came off a injury that took 2 years to heal. i wouldn't take him. this would be an awesome deal if we added a guy like mcdougal and they would give us shields in return. scot shields is awesome and is very versittle. if we can get him this trade would be a major upgrade for the sox

Flight #24
11-28-2006, 04:10 PM
[quote=Flight #24;1423156]

You're counting out Josh Fields this year at 3B?

I don't think the Sox would allow Figgins to play 3B more than 15-20 games.


No, I'm just saying that Joe Crede is worth a ton more than Figgins & Santana. The Sox can plug Fields in as it is in LF or even at 3B by trading Joe for something worthwhile. Figgins may be an upgrade to Pods, but if so, he's a small one - not worth losing Crede for, let alone Garcia.

Crede and Pods for Figgins and Wood could work. Crede straight up for Figgins and Santana isn't that attractive, but I could see it with the excalation in cost for pitching.

Garcia ought to have significant value to a team short on SPs. I'm thinking a team like Texas for at least one of their top pitching prospects. AThat by itself would be a hell of a lot better than Crede & Garcia for Figgins and Santana.

Chw2007
11-28-2006, 04:13 PM
Maybe we can coax Rafael Palmeiro out of retirement, too.

Ixnay.

maybe even jose canseco can comeback then he can help raffy inject steriods saying that he accidentally took them lol. whoever said konerko for santana is a retard. let's get real we can work a trade for vladi if we threw in pauly and a pitcher or somethin. not sayin it's true just sayin what a possiblity is to prove the vaule of konerko.

Ol' No. 2
11-28-2006, 04:20 PM
maybe even jose canseco can comeback then he can help raffy inject steriods saying that he accidentally took them lol. whoever said konerko for santana is a retard. let's get real we can work a trade for vladi if we threw in pauly and a pitcher or somethin. not sayin it's true just sayin what a possiblity is to prove the vaule of konerko.See ya.

Tragg
11-28-2006, 04:25 PM
Just because we have Fields doesn't mean we should post a bargain price on Joe Crede.
The package seems a little light.

guillen4life13
11-28-2006, 04:32 PM
I don't think that the Sox currently have a better clutch hitter than Crede. I think that counts for something.

I'd be more willing to trade Konerko than Crede, TBQH. If Crede has gone to respected and credible doctors who say that with the right conditioning program, his back will be alright, I see more long term upside to him than Konerko. But it is very close. And I'll put it out there right now that I have never been the biggest Konerko fan.

Crede is probably my favorite current Sox player also, so my bias is playing a big part. I just see great fielding, good/great hitting 3B's as a dying breed, and it's a relative norm to have an ok fielding, great hitting 1B. Should I say, it's easier to replace.

The only way I'd do the deal (Crede&Garcia for Figgins&Santana) is if KW uses that extra money towards getting a good power hitter. Yes, Manny does come to mind. Or he turns around and trades Vazquez+Uribe for Michael Young.

I can't justify the loss, primarily on defense considering the type of starters we have (groundballs) of Crede so easily.

spiffie
11-28-2006, 04:39 PM
I don't think that the Sox currently have a better clutch hitter than Crede. I think that counts for something.

I assume you're basing this on his 237/276/462 line in close and late situations over the last three years? Or is it on the fact that he has gotten a couple of hits in big situations, which we remember to the exclusion of the many more times that he has not?

caulfield12
11-28-2006, 08:34 PM
Kind of like the Timo Perez is a clutch hitter thing from 2-3 big moments over 2 seasons.

Valentin was always the most clutch to me...last year, you would have to go with Dye and maybe Pods second, even though I would have been happier with Pods having the impact on the basepaths he had in 2005. Stolen base totals alone don't tell the Tale of Two Seasons.

Lip Man 1
11-28-2006, 09:03 PM
Chw2007:

Paragraphs, spacing and capital letters are your friends and make your comments a hell of a lot easier to read and more importantly, to understand.

Try it.

Lip

DickAllen72
11-28-2006, 10:01 PM
OK, here's what the Sox do:

KW trades Garcia and Crede to the Angels for Figgins and Santana.

Then he flips Santana along with Fields and Anderson to the Marlins for Miguel Cabrera.

Figgins in Left, Sweeney in Center and Dye in Right along with Cabrera at Third, Uribe at Short, Iguchi at Second and Konerko at First. Pierzynski Catches and Thome at DH. McCarthy moves into the rotation.

Sox get faster, younger, cheaper and arguably better.

guillen4life13
11-28-2006, 10:33 PM
OK, here's what the Sox do:

KW trades Garcia and Crede to the Angels for Figgins and Santana.

Then he flips Santana along with Fields and Anderson to the Marlins for Miguel Cabrera.

Figgins in Left, Sweeney in Center and Dye in Right along with Cabrera at Third, Uribe at Short, Iguchi at Second and Konerko at First. Pierzynski Catches and Thome at DH. McCarthy moves into the rotation.

Sox get faster, younger, cheaper and arguably better.

At first I gagged when I read that, and then I looked at it again. I wouldn't be against that, especially considering Cabrera's age.

I don't know about giving up Santana, Fields, and Anderson. Maybe this is a pipe dream, but I would throw in Figgins, and sub Uribe for Anderson and see if we can get Hanley Ramirez also.

It may be worth a shot. Who knows. That would be a total blockbuster but I think that it looks alright from both sides of the deal.

caulfield12
11-29-2006, 12:15 AM
You're never going to get Hanley Ramirez.

And Anderson + Fields doesn't come close to getting you Cabrera

samram
11-29-2006, 07:55 AM
You're never going to get Hanley Ramirez.

And Anderson + Fields doesn't come close to getting you Cabrera

Right. Plus, the Marlins have plenty of young starting pitching. They're not going to give up perhaps their two best position players to get another young pitcher and some prospects and maybe a goofball shortstop.