PDA

View Full Version : Levine rumor


Jaffar
12-29-2006, 09:43 AM
So the very reliable Bruce Levine is the reporting on ESPN radio 1000 that the Sox are going after Baldelli. :gulp: to the rumor mill!

Madvora
12-29-2006, 09:46 AM
This idea was reported a month ago. Levine sucks.

http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=81959&highlight=Baldelli

spawn
12-29-2006, 11:01 AM
Levineline probably got his info from reading WSI...

UserNameBlank
12-29-2006, 11:26 AM
If he costs us Gio or Danks I'd say no way. Then again, its Levine. He's probably smokin' pot with Miss Cleo right now.

Hitmen77
12-29-2006, 11:44 AM
Has Levine EVER been right about any rumor? Sheesh, how can someone keep spewing rumors and be considered credible on a media outlet when he's wrong close to 100% of the time?

HawkDJ
12-29-2006, 11:52 AM
But Baldelli or not, we are gonna get a backup center fielder...right? Wasn't that HUGE problem last year?

CashMan
12-29-2006, 12:22 PM
Has Levine EVER been right about any rumor? Sheesh, how can someone keep spewing rumors and be considered credible on a media outlet when he's wrong close to 100% of the time?


It is ESPN, who is their competition?

Domeshot17
12-29-2006, 12:22 PM
But Baldelli or not, we are gonna get a backup center fielder...right? Wasn't that HUGE problem last year?


Well Baldelli means Brian is the 4th OF (or Pods) and both would be fine in a back up CF role.

If not, this years experiment is looking to be a toss up between Cintron and Ozuna in Center.

JohnTucker0814
12-29-2006, 12:36 PM
I would think that Gavin Floyd and another prospect should return us Baldeli. Tampa Bay doesn't have a lot of ground to demand a ransom. Every team knows they have a surplus of OF and Baldeli has had some injuries. Just because Tampa says they want 2 SP and a SS... doesn't mean they are going to get it. Kenny said if he trades a SP he wants a Major League SP in return... did he get that? NO!

HOWEVER: WHY DO WE WANT BALDELI AGAIN? Here is the comparison over the past 4 years with Pods:

Pods:
2003 = 154 gms - .314 ave - .379 obp - .443 slg - 43 sb - 10 cs
2004 = 154 gms - .244 ave - .313 obp - .364 slg - 70 sb - 13 cs
2005 = 129 gms - .290 ave - .351 obp - .349 slg - 59 sb - 23 cs
2006 = 139 gms - .261 ave - .330 obp - .353 slg - 40 sb - 19 cs

Baldeli:
2003 = 156 gms - .289 ave - .326 obp - .416 slg - 27 sb - 10 cs
2004 = 136 gms - .280 ave - .326 obp - .436 slg - 17 sb - 4 cs
2005 = dnp
2006 = 92 gms - .302 ave - .339 obp - .533 slg - 10 sb - 1 cs

I could see Baldeli being a good #2 hitter; but we are all mistaken if we think he could take over at leadoff! Pods has a better OBP and "we" think he stinks.

Brian26
12-29-2006, 01:07 PM
Has Levine EVER been right about any rumor?

Occassionally he is.

As an example, I remember his Talking Baseball morning show from 2004 when he mentioned the Sox were going to reacquire Carl Everett from the Expos to fill in after Frank's injury. The trade was announced later that afternoon.

Craig Grebeck
12-29-2006, 01:08 PM
I would think that Gavin Floyd and another prospect should return us Baldeli. Tampa Bay doesn't have a lot of ground to demand a ransom. Every team knows they have a surplus of OF and Baldeli has had some injuries. Just because Tampa says they want 2 SP and a SS... doesn't mean they are going to get it. Kenny said if he trades a SP he wants a Major League SP in return... did he get that? NO!

HOWEVER: WHY DO WE WANT BALDELI AGAIN? Here is the comparison over the past 4 years with Pods:

Pods:
2003 = 154 gms - .314 ave - .379 obp - .443 slg - 43 sb - 10 cs
2004 = 154 gms - .244 ave - .313 obp - .364 slg - 70 sb - 13 cs
2005 = 129 gms - .290 ave - .351 obp - .349 slg - 59 sb - 23 cs
2006 = 139 gms - .261 ave - .330 obp - .353 slg - 40 sb - 19 cs

Baldeli:
2003 = 156 gms - .289 ave - .326 obp - .416 slg - 27 sb - 10 cs
2004 = 136 gms - .280 ave - .326 obp - .436 slg - 17 sb - 4 cs
2005 = dnp
2006 = 92 gms - .302 ave - .339 obp - .533 slg - 10 sb - 1 cs

I could see Baldeli being a good #2 hitter; but we are all mistaken if we think he could take over at leadoff! Pods has a better OBP and "we" think he stinks.
Look at the OPS. Baldelli is also very young. Tadahito could leadoff.

Palehose13
12-29-2006, 01:15 PM
But Baldelli or not, we are gonna get a backup center fielder...right? Wasn't that HUGE problem last year?

I would guess that if KW got Baldelli, Brian Anderson is then the back up centerfielder.

ChiTownTrojan
12-29-2006, 01:17 PM
I would think that Gavin Floyd and another prospect should return us Baldeli. Tampa Bay doesn't have a lot of ground to demand a ransom. Every team knows they have a surplus of OF and Baldeli has had some injuries. Just because Tampa says they want 2 SP and a SS... doesn't mean they are going to get it. Kenny said if he trades a SP he wants a Major League SP in return... did he get that? NO!

HOWEVER: WHY DO WE WANT BALDELI AGAIN? Here is the comparison over the past 4 years with Pods:

Pods:
2003 = 154 gms - .314 ave - .379 obp - .443 slg - 43 sb - 10 cs
2004 = 154 gms - .244 ave - .313 obp - .364 slg - 70 sb - 13 cs
2005 = 129 gms - .290 ave - .351 obp - .349 slg - 59 sb - 23 cs
2006 = 139 gms - .261 ave - .330 obp - .353 slg - 40 sb - 19 cs

Baldeli:
2003 = 156 gms - .289 ave - .326 obp - .416 slg - 27 sb - 10 cs
2004 = 136 gms - .280 ave - .326 obp - .436 slg - 17 sb - 4 cs
2005 = dnp
2006 = 92 gms - .302 ave - .339 obp - .533 slg - 10 sb - 1 cs

I could see Baldeli being a good #2 hitter; but we are all mistaken if we think he could take over at leadoff! Pods has a better OBP and "we" think he stinks.

Baldelli is a better fielder than Pods ever was. He's also got more power, which isn't essential for a leadoff guy, but definitely has value. A guy is much more likely to score if he's hitting doubles, tripples, and obviously home runs. And in Pods "bad years", the difference between the two is even more significant. Oh yeah, did I mention he's 5-6 yrs younger? There's still room for improvement, whereas Pods is definitely on the decline.

Both guys have had injuries, so the difference between them has a lot to do with who can stay healthy (my bet is on the younger guy). It also depends on who we have to give up to get him.

Does anyone know Baldelli's contract situation?

ChiTownTrojan
12-29-2006, 01:23 PM
I would guess that if KW got Baldelli, Brian Anderson is then the back up centerfielder.
I would guess there would be a type of 3-man rotation in CF and LF. When Pods sits, Anderson would be in center (he's the best fielder) and Baldelli would go to left (he or Iguchi would lead off). When BA sits, Baldelli moves over to CF. When Baldelli sits, we've got 2006.

Palehose13
12-29-2006, 01:25 PM
I would guess there would be a type of 3-man rotation in CF and LF. When Pods sits, Anderson would be in center (he's the best fielder) and Baldelli would go to left (he or Iguchi would lead off). When BA sits, Baldelli moves over to CF. When Baldelli sits, we've got 2006.

Makes sense, but I think Baldelli will sit the least out of all three and Anderson sits the most.

ChiTownTrojan
12-29-2006, 01:35 PM
Makes sense, but I think Baldelli will sit the least out of all three and Anderson sits the most.
Agreed on Baldelli playing the most, but between Pods and BA it would be based on performance and improvement from 2006. Whoever bounces back the best will see the majority of the starts. Pods on the bench gives us a second pinch running threat, as well, for those close games.

AJ Hellraiser
12-29-2006, 01:39 PM
A buddy of mine is a producer at the Score... in Tampa, the rumored deal has us sending Broadway, Massett and Anderson for Baldelli.. Personally, I think it's a steal....

insiders in the Sox organization think Broadway has topped out and will never be better than a No. 4 starter... If we get Baldelli, there is no need for Anderson seeing as Owens or Sweeney can be the 4th OF... the only guy I mind losing here is Massett as I think he makes our bullpen terrific, but I think whoever loses the battle for 5th starter between Floyd and Haeger will go to the bullpen...

If this trade goes down, it's a steal if Baldelli stays healthy...

hi im skot
12-29-2006, 01:44 PM
A buddy of mine is a producer at the Score... in Tampa, the rumored deal has us sending Broadway, Massett and Anderson for Baldelli.. Personally, I think it's a steal....

insiders in the Sox organization think Broadway has topped out and will never be better than a No. 4 starter... If we get Baldelli, there is no need for Anderson seeing as Owens or Sweeney can be the 4th OF... the only guy I mind losing here is Massett as I think he makes our bullpen terrific, but I think whoever loses the battle for 5th starter between Floyd and Haeger will go to the bullpen...

If this trade goes down, it's a steal if Baldelli stays healthy...

Always a good way to begin your first post.

But seriously...that seems like an awful lot to give up for Baldelli. Sorry, but I'm still on the Crawford bandwagon (yeah, I get it...it ain't happenin'). I'd give up that (and obviously something more) for him...but Baldelli? I don't know.

esbrechtel
12-29-2006, 01:51 PM
i do feel that is a little much for rocco...we will have to see...

Palehose13
12-29-2006, 01:55 PM
Always a good way to begin your first post.

But seriously...that seems like an awful lot to give up for Baldelli. Sorry, but I'm still on the Crawford bandwagon (yeah, I get it...it ain't happenin'). I'd give up that (and obviously something more) for him...but Baldelli? I don't know.

That is a bit too much for Baldelli, IMO. Broadway and Anderson, sure. But not two pitchers and a CFer.

Gammons Peter
12-29-2006, 02:09 PM
A buddy of mine is a producer at the Score... in Tampa, the rumored deal has us sending Broadway, Massett and Anderson for Baldelli.. Personally, I think it's a steal....

insiders in the Sox organization think Broadway has topped out and will never be better than a No. 4 starter... If we get Baldelli, there is no need for Anderson seeing as Owens or Sweeney can be the 4th OF... the only guy I mind losing here is Massett as I think he makes our bullpen terrific, but I think whoever loses the battle for 5th starter between Floyd and Haeger will go to the bullpen...

If this trade goes down, it's a steal if Baldelli stays healthy...

Score producers have a direct pipeline to Tampa's front office?

I've been on several Tampa sites/forums and I haven't seen those players mentioned.

Why would Tampa want Anderson? They are trying to unload OFers's

JermaineDye05
12-29-2006, 02:11 PM
I don't want to be giving up Masset in this deal and Anderson what happens with the 4th OF spot then if Anderson goes? This then makes the trade McCarthy, Broadway, and Anderson for Danks and Baldelli which seems kind of lopsided especially when Baldelli is injured a lot.

ChiSoxLifer
12-29-2006, 02:23 PM
Shhhh....no one tell Tampa we no longer have Cy McCarthy.

EMachine10
12-29-2006, 02:42 PM
not exactly sure why people like to merge trades together. any deal involving TB wouldn't have to do with the McCarthy deal...just my opinion.

buehrle4cy05
12-29-2006, 02:43 PM
That is a bit too much for Baldelli, IMO. Broadway and Anderson, sure. But not two pitchers and a CFer.

I'd be hesitant to give up Broadway. If KW really is going for youth, Broadway seems like a guy who could round out the rotation nicely in a few years.

maurice
12-29-2006, 02:45 PM
Too much to give up for a guy who spends so much time on the DL.

SABRSox
12-29-2006, 03:02 PM
A buddy of mine is a producer at the Score... in Tampa, the rumored deal has us sending Broadway, Massett and Anderson for Baldelli.. Personally, I think it's a steal....

insiders in the Sox organization think Broadway has topped out and will never be better than a No. 4 starter... If we get Baldelli, there is no need for Anderson seeing as Owens or Sweeney can be the 4th OF... the only guy I mind losing here is Massett as I think he makes our bullpen terrific, but I think whoever loses the battle for 5th starter between Floyd and Haeger will go to the bullpen...

If this trade goes down, it's a steal if Baldelli stays healthy...

Ugh, too much. Take away Anderson, and that's getting better. Exchange Massett with a lesser prospect, and then I'd do it.

Gammons Peter
12-29-2006, 03:17 PM
I see Otis is here. What do you hear Otis??????

SoCalWhiteSoxFan
12-29-2006, 03:42 PM
A buddy of mine is a producer at the Score... in Tampa, the rumored deal has us sending Broadway, Massett and Anderson for Baldelli.. Personally, I think it's a steal....

insiders in the Sox organization think Broadway has topped out and will never be better than a No. 4 starter... If we get Baldelli, there is no need for Anderson seeing as Owens or Sweeney can be the 4th OF... the only guy I mind losing here is Massett as I think he makes our bullpen terrific, but I think whoever loses the battle for 5th starter between Floyd and Haeger will go to the bullpen...

If this trade goes down, it's a steal if Baldelli stays healthy...

I think Baldelli is way overrated. His career OBP% is only .329. I think Anderson in time will be better than him.

CWSpalehoseCWS
12-29-2006, 03:58 PM
Ugh, too much. Take away Anderson, and that's getting better. Exchange Massett with a lesser prospect, and then I'd do it.

Yeah, Anderson has a a great glove. There's no doubt in my mind that he'll come around as a hitter.

otis
12-29-2006, 04:16 PM
I haven't heard much. I do know that the Sox like Anderson and any deal for a CF might make Pods the odd man out with Anderson moving to left.

I'll post with any news, but it has been quite for a few weeks.

SABRSox
12-29-2006, 04:19 PM
I haven't heard much. I do know that the Sox like Anderson and any deal for a CF might make Pods the odd man out with Anderson moving to left.

I'll post with any news, but it has been quite for a few weeks.

I don't think Anderson would move to left, but hey, any deal that makes Pods the 4th OF is a-okay with me.

AJ Hellraiser
12-29-2006, 04:21 PM
My dream personally is Carl Crawford... he is my favorite non-White Sox player in the league and I'd love to see him patrolling centerfield or left field at the cell for the next decade...

However, the bottom line is that he isn't going anywhere... the Devil Rays want to build around him... I've been told by many friends in the sports journalism industry working in Chicago that I need to stop dreaming about him... From what I've been told, everytime KW tries inquiring about Crawford the D'Rays ask for a PACKAGE centering around Garland... now, if they wanted Buehrle in his walk year then I might reconsider...

HotelWhiteSox
12-29-2006, 04:32 PM
A buddy of mine is a producer at the Score... in Tampa, the rumored deal has us sending Broadway, Massett and Anderson for Baldelli.. Personally, I think it's a steal....

insiders in the Sox organization think Broadway has topped out and will never be better than a No. 4 starter... If we get Baldelli, there is no need for Anderson seeing as Owens or Sweeney can be the 4th OF... the only guy I mind losing here is Massett as I think he makes our bullpen terrific, but I think whoever loses the battle for 5th starter between Floyd and Haeger will go to the bullpen...

If this trade goes down, it's a steal if Baldelli stays healthy...

Thanks for the info, but Levine is at AM1000, unless it is really swirling and both stations are reporting it.

But yeah, come on Bruce, better be something new or close because this is like 4 week old news, sounds like he had to come up with some rumor quota or something

TheOldRoman
12-29-2006, 05:08 PM
But yeah, come on Bruce, better be something new or close because this is like 4 week old news, sounds like he had to come up with some rumor quota or something
Well, he had to make up something to talk about. Management wasn't happy with some of his recent investigative reporting.

http://images.radcity.net/5176/584831.jpg
"Billy likes to drink milk. Miss Lippy's car... is green."

Sargeant79
12-29-2006, 05:58 PM
I don't think Anderson would move to left, but hey, any deal that makes Pods the 4th OF is a-okay with me.

Agreed. I admit that I'm not that familiar with the specifics of Baldelli's defensive capabilities other than the fact that he is pretty good. But it would seem that given his injuries they might want to leave Anderson in CF. Some of you may think I'm crazy, but I firmly believe that Anderson's defense already is among the top five in the league.

esbrechtel
12-29-2006, 06:17 PM
Some of you may think I'm crazy, but I firmly believe that Anderson's defense already is among the top five in the league.

not crazy...that guy is amazing in CF he makes it look so effortless, he has a great arm and amazing reads off the bat...

AJ Hellraiser
12-29-2006, 06:18 PM
Thanks for the info, but Levine is at AM1000, unless it is really swirling and both stations are reporting it.

But yeah, come on Bruce, better be something new or close because this is like 4 week old news, sounds like he had to come up with some rumor quota or something

I am aware that Levine is at AM1000... the rumor is swirling big time... According to Levine when I spoke with him last week, KW told him they want Pods to be their #9 hitter and will address the leadoff spot before spring training.... Baldelli seems to be the most likely fit at this point in time... combine that with all the young arms we have stockpiled and we now have the pieces to trade whether its for a superstar or an above average guy like Baldelli,...

Either way, Baldelli sure beats Kenny Lofton experiment #2

HotelWhiteSox
12-29-2006, 06:33 PM
pretty good Levine interview on AM1000 talking about the McCarthy trade. Said that earlier (it was on in the background, not sure if he said last year or in the offseason), KW offered Freddy and Garland (separately) for the same package from Texas and both got rejected, but they asked for McCarthy and KW did it in a second. Not as much about McCarthy, but about the deal he was getting

AJ Hellraiser
12-29-2006, 06:55 PM
I heard the same thing.. that KW jumped on the McCarthy deal right away.... Let's not kid ourselves here, Brandon in a sense is still a "prospect" he's just farther along then Danks...

However, KW clearly thinks Danks' ceilins is higher and that Massett can help our bullpen NOW.. or KW thinks by stockpiling so many good young arms he can swing more deals... with pitching contracts as they are, not only do we need young arms to move into the rotation in the next few years but other teams will as well and may be willing to trade enormous amounts for them...

Brian26
12-29-2006, 07:51 PM
I've been told by many friends in the sports journalism industry working in Chicago that I need to stop dreaming about him...

Name one person in the "sports journalism industry" in Chicago that knows what's going on.

Flight #24
12-29-2006, 08:22 PM
I am aware that Levine is at AM1000... the rumor is swirling big time... According to Levine when I spoke with him last week, KW told him they want Pods to be their #9 hitter and will address the leadoff spot before spring training.... Baldelli seems to be the most likely fit at this point in time... combine that with all the young arms we have stockpiled and we now have the pieces to trade whether its for a superstar or an above average guy like Baldelli,...

Either way, Baldelli sure beats Kenny Lofton experiment #2

So basically, KW would rather have Pods in the lineup than Anderson? Not sure I'd agree with that. I don't know that Pods has that much value for his speed if you have to bury him in the #9 spot. I'd rather have Uribe/Anderson #9 and Baldelli/Pods #1. Plus a Dye-Anderson-Baldelli OF makes me :drool: defensively.

JB98
12-29-2006, 08:33 PM
Name one person in the "sports journalism industry" in Chicago that knows what's going on.

I'm the Assistant Sports Editor at the Aurora paper! I read WSI, so I know what's going on!

:supernana: :supernana:

Daver
12-29-2006, 08:41 PM
I'm the Assistant Sports Editor at the Aurora paper! I read WSI, so I know what's going on!

:supernana: :supernana:

Aurora has a paper?

















:redneck

JB98
12-29-2006, 08:46 PM
Aurora has a paper?

















:redneck

Hey, we have 150,000 people living here. We're not all rednecks. :rolleyes:

soxtalker
12-29-2006, 08:59 PM
pretty good Levine interview on AM1000 talking about the McCarthy trade. Said that earlier (it was on in the background, not sure if he said last year or in the offseason), KW offered Freddy and Garland (separately) for the same package from Texas and both got rejected, but they asked for McCarthy and KW did it in a second. Not as much about McCarthy, but about the deal he was getting

I heard at least part of the Levine interview/report this afternoon. The most interesting part, however, was a discussion of why Garland was not acceptable to the Rangers. Evidently, under the rules (I believe of the collective bargaining agreement), Garland, being in the middle of a long-term contract, would have been allowed to demand a trade after one year. That's no longer the case under the new agreement, but someone in a situation like Garland is grandfathered in. If that is true, that reduces the value of Garland (and JC) in any trade -- not just to Texas -- as the new team would only have control for one year.

Steelrod
12-29-2006, 09:18 PM
Name one person in the "sports journalism industry" in Chicago that knows what's going on.
Jerome Holtzman!

SOXSINCE'70
12-29-2006, 11:18 PM
Jerome Holtzman!

I thought "the unibrow" was retired.

jabrch
12-29-2006, 11:57 PM
Aurora has a paper?




:redneck


Sure they do...
http://f5c.yahoofs.com/shopping/3015138/simg_t_tmarkoinc_1860_762243110?rm_____DljauHq7F

Hitmen77
12-30-2006, 12:00 AM
Occassionally he is.

As an example, I remember his Talking Baseball morning show from 2004 when he mentioned the Sox were going to reacquire Carl Everett from the Expos to fill in after Frank's injury. The trade was announced later that afternoon.

I doubt this will be another one of those rare times that he's right.

Craig Grebeck
12-30-2006, 12:30 AM
I think Baldelli is way overrated. His career OBP% is only .329. I think Anderson in time will be better than him.
Wanna bet?

Save McCuddy's
12-30-2006, 12:46 AM
Rocco would blow up to 3 bills if given 24/7 proximity to the breaded steaks of Bridgeport. Bad idea.

itsnotrequired
12-30-2006, 02:39 AM
Rocco would blow up to 3 bills if given 24/7 proximity to the breaded steaks of Bridgeport. Bad idea.

Now this is funny...

SoCalWhiteSoxFan
12-30-2006, 05:54 AM
Wanna bet?

Sure. Anderson's minor league stats were very good. In any event, I would not trade Anderson straight up for Baldelli, let alone Anderson plus pitching prospects. Baldelli is simply not a high OBP% guy; he's way overrated.

SoCalWhiteSoxFan
12-30-2006, 05:56 AM
Wanna bet?

And one thing I would add is that I do think KW may have traded the wrong outfielder (i.e., Chris Young) to obtain Vazquez. I bet he wishes he could take that one back.

beck72
12-30-2006, 06:05 AM
And one thing I would add is that I do think KW may have traded the wrong outfielder (i.e., Chris Young) to obtain Vazquez. I bet he wishes he could take that one back.
Young has a .267 career avg---in the minors. He will probably never hit for a high avg. in the majors. That is the big reason he was expendable.

Craig Grebeck
12-30-2006, 09:30 AM
Sure. Anderson's minor league stats were very good. In any event, I would not trade Anderson straight up for Baldelli, let alone Anderson plus pitching prospects. Baldelli is simply not a high OBP% guy; he's way overrated.
Baldelli is one year older and has already shown 100x the potential that Brian has. If Baldelli is not a high OBP guy, then what does that make Brian?

southside rocks
12-30-2006, 09:46 AM
Baldelli is one year older and has already shown 100x the potential that Brian has. If Baldelli is not a high OBP guy, then what does that make Brian?

A Devil Ray?

I'd love to see that deal bring Baldelli to the Sox.

jabrch
12-30-2006, 10:31 AM
Baldelli is one year older and has already shown 100x the potential that Brian has. If Baldelli is not a high OBP guy, then what does that make Brian?

What is it you love about Baldelli's .329 OBP (in both his 3 years in the majors and his 4 years in the minors) but hate with a vitriolic passion about Podsednik's .342 obp?

Please don't tell me your problem is with your leadoff hitter's slugging %.

I wouldn't come anywhere close to paying the Devilrays price for Baldelli. I wouldn't give them BA, straight up, for him. BA has a much higher ceiling.

I believe we have 2 pretty valuable properties in Sweeney and BA. I wouldn't give them up on a player like Rocco - who will be entering his second arbitration year.

Craig Grebeck
12-30-2006, 05:57 PM
What is it you love about Baldelli's .329 OBP (in both his 3 years in the majors and his 4 years in the minors) but hate with a vitriolic passion about Podsednik's .342 obp?

Please don't tell me your problem is with your leadoff hitter's slugging %.

I wouldn't come anywhere close to paying the Devilrays price for Baldelli. I wouldn't give them BA, straight up, for him. BA has a much higher ceiling.

I believe we have 2 pretty valuable properties in Sweeney and BA. I wouldn't give them up on a player like Rocco - who will be entering his second arbitration year.
I guess I'll list the reasons to like Rocco and dislike Pods:
1- Scott will be 31 on opening day. Rocco will be 25.
2- I wouldn't bat Rocco leadoff. For now he's a bottom of the order hitter. If Rocco was acquired, I'd prefer him in LF and Brian in CF. Gooch can leadoff. Scott is widely considered a leadoff hitter because he's fast (or used to be) and scrappy.
3- Rocco is locked down to an extremely reasonable contract through 2011.
07:$0.75M, 08:$2.25M, 09:$6M club option ($4M buyout), 10:$8M club option, 11:$9M club option ($2M buyout - 2010 & 2011 options must be exercised together)
4- Rocco has progressed in his three years in the majors. His OPS, OPS+, and EQA have all increased every year. Scott is wildly inconsistent, and has had ONE above average offensive season in his entire career.

How on earth does BA have a higher ceiling? They'll both be 25 on opening day, and Baldelli has already established himself as a solid player.

FWIW, as I stated earlier, I'd keep BA in center and put Rocco in left (if he was acquired).

Brian26
12-30-2006, 06:20 PM
This is an interesting lineup-

1- Iguchi 2b
2- Baldelli LF
3- Dye RF
4- Konerko 1b
5- Thome DH
6- Crede 3b
7- Pierzynski C
8- Anderson CF
9- Uribe SS

Chisox003
12-30-2006, 06:27 PM
This is an interesting lineup-

1- Iguchi 2b
2- Baldelli LF
3- Dye RF
4- Konerko 1b
5- Thome DH
6- Crede 3b
7- Pierzynski C
8- Anderson CF
9- Uribe SS
or...

Podsednik - LF
Baldelli - CF
Dye - RF
Konerko - 1B
Thome - DH
Iguchi - 2B
Crede - 3B
Pierzynski - C
Uribe SS

or....
Baldelli - LF
Iguchi - 2B
Dye - RF
Konerko - 1B
Thome - DH
Crede - 3B
Pierzynski - C
Anderson CF
Uribe SS

I won't get my hopes up. But I'd love to have Rocco. If not for his improvement of the team, then at least for the name.

JB98
12-30-2006, 08:15 PM
Sure. Anderson's minor league stats were very good. In any event, I would not trade Anderson straight up for Baldelli, let alone Anderson plus pitching prospects. Baldelli is simply not a high OBP% guy; he's way overrated.

Other than blind faith and hope, I can't see how someone would rather have Anderson than Baldelli. They're the same age, and Baldelli has done more at the major-league level at this point.

I'd trade Anderson and two prospects for Baldelli and not think twice about it.

oeo
12-30-2006, 08:32 PM
Other than blind faith and hope, I can't see how someone would rather have Anderson than Baldelli. They're the same age, and Baldelli has done more at the major-league level at this point.

I'd trade Anderson and two prospects for Baldelli and not think twice about it.

I'll give you a reason: we don't have to give anything up to keep Anderson. Baldelli will not be worth what we have to give up, so no thanks.

And I'm really doubting that Kenny is going to turn around and trade the prospects he's gotten; he's going to keep them. And good thing for that because Baldelli will be on the DL by May, and then we're stuck in the same spot we were last year. Anderson will improve and Pods will as well, and we don't have to move anyone to keep them.

EMel9281
12-30-2006, 08:43 PM
Well, he had to make up something to talk about. Management wasn't happy with some of his recent investigative reporting.

http://images.radcity.net/5176/584831.jpg
"Billy likes to drink milk. Miss Lippy's car... is green."

It's an older post, but THAT is funny! :rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

And, I would like to see Baldelli here. Have him split time w/ BA and give BA time to develop and learn a little. The price must be right for him, however. Don't blow the bank on Rocco...

Hitmen77
12-30-2006, 09:26 PM
I'll give you a reason: we don't have to give anything up to keep Anderson. Baldelli will not be worth what we have to give up, so no thanks.

And I'm really doubting that Kenny is going to turn around and trade the prospects he's gotten; he's going to keep them. And good thing for that because Baldelli will be on the DL by May, and then we're stuck in the same spot we were last year. Anderson will improve and Pods will as well, and we don't have to move anyone to keep them.

I agree. Unless the Sox have totally given up on BA after only his rookie season, then from KW's point of view, it doesn't make sense to use up our trades to get a new CF instead of stocking up on pitching.

Likewise with SS. I was dreaming about Michael Young just like many other Sox fans. But, I think in the end the Sox decided that their best bet was to stick with a top-notch fielding SS than obtain a new SS and fail to stock up on pitching.

JB98
12-30-2006, 09:30 PM
I'll give you a reason: we don't have to give anything up to keep Anderson. Baldelli will not be worth what we have to give up, so no thanks.

And I'm really doubting that Kenny is going to turn around and trade the prospects he's gotten; he's going to keep them. And good thing for that because Baldelli will be on the DL by May, and then we're stuck in the same spot we were last year. Anderson will improve and Pods will as well, and we don't have to move anyone to keep them.

You have a difference in philosophy with me. I'm always willing to trade prospects for the right now. Always. To me, giving up prospects for Baldelli is nothing. And I don't like Anderson at all, so I'd do just about anything to find a better CF.

PalehosePlanet
12-30-2006, 09:53 PM
Other than blind faith and hope, I can't see how someone would rather have Anderson than Baldelli. They're the same age, and Baldelli has done more at the major-league level at this point.

I'd trade Anderson and two prospects for Baldelli and not think twice about it.

I agree; Baldelli is signed for 5 more years at a maximum of 26 million. That's cheap for a player who is a natural all around player and will only get better.

Tragg
12-30-2006, 10:21 PM
Other than blind faith and hope, I can't see how someone would rather have Anderson than Baldelli. They're the same age, and Baldelli has done more at the major-league level at this point.

I'd trade Anderson and two prospects for Baldelli and not think twice about it. Consdering that Baldelli has checked in with three full years of mediocre power (homers in the teens) and a poor OBP (.330s with a particularly woeful walk rate) with no improvement or upticking trends, what is there in Baldelli other than "Blind faith and hope" that suggests he's anything more than a mediocre hitter?

JB98
12-30-2006, 10:36 PM
Consdering that Baldelli has checked in with three full years of mediocre power (homers in the teens) and a poor OBP (.330s with a particularly woeful walk rate) with no improvement or upticking trends, what is there in Baldelli other than "Blind faith and hope" that suggests he's anything more than a mediocre hitter?

I'd say it's the lifetime .289 batting average with double-digit home runs and double-digit steals in each of the three years he's played.

He hit 16 HRs and drove in 57 runs in only 92 games last year. Project that over a full season, and it's pretty damn good. Certainly better than anything we can reasonably expect from BA in 2007. The key for Baldelli is his health. If he can play 150 games, there's a good chance you'll see 25 HRs and 90 RBIs.

Domeshot17
12-30-2006, 11:32 PM
Baldelli before his injuries was one of the bigger prospects around. The guy gets out shadowed because of the major specs tampa has, and his knee, but man get him off the turf and onto some fresh grass and keep him healthy, and he is going to flourish.

If you can get Baldelli for some kind of package of Broadway-Heager and a B spec, I would do it in a second.

ondafarm
12-31-2006, 12:19 AM
Tadahito could leadoff.

Very doubtful.

If the Sox trade for any outfielder this off-season I will be shocked.

Craig Grebeck
12-31-2006, 12:31 AM
Very doubtful.

Why?

JB98
12-31-2006, 12:37 AM
Why?

I just don't think the Sox have that in their plans. They've been wanting to move Tadahito down in the lineup. Obviously, he's not a prototypical leadoff hitter because of the strikeouts, and he's not a great basestealer. My main concern with hitting him leadoff would be his streakiness. When he goes cold, he's not even making contact. Not sure how he'd be an upgrade over Pods, other than he'd provide more power to that position in the lineup.

soxinem1
12-31-2006, 01:55 AM
I hate to say it, but these are all pipe dreams, Baldelli is NOT coming here, and the only place Uribe is going other than out to play SS, is to jail.:smile:

JB98
12-31-2006, 02:11 AM
I hate to say it, but these are all pipe dreams, Baldelli is NOT coming here, and the only place Uribe is going other than out to play SS, is to jail.:smile:

I agree that Baldelli is not coming here, but I joined the argument simply because I think it's plain silly that people believe Anderson "has a greater upside" than Baldelli. The only thing BA has on Baldelli is health, and let's face it, that's luck as much as anything.

ChiTownTrojan
12-31-2006, 02:17 AM
I hate to say it, but these are all pipe dreams, Baldelli is NOT coming here, and the only place Uribe is going other than out to play SS, is to jail.:smile:

The way things are going this offseason, if there's a rumor about a trade you can pretty much guarantee that it isn't going to happen.

oeo
12-31-2006, 02:46 AM
I agree that Baldelli is not coming here, but I joined the argument simply because I think it's plain silly that people believe Anderson "has a greater upside" than Baldelli. The only thing BA has on Baldelli is health, and let's face it, that's luck as much as anything.

When you're getting injured like Baldelli, it's not just bad luck, he's injury prone. For whatever reason, he tweaks/injures something all the time...sorry, but I don't want to watch him in and out from week to week. ESPECIALLY when we have to give up some prospects for him. I think we're better off standing pat.

jabrch
12-31-2006, 04:51 AM
I guess I'll list the reasons to like Rocco and dislike Pods:
1- Scott will be 31 on opening day. Rocco will be 25. Which one had major knee surgery?
2- I wouldn't bat Rocco leadoff. For now he's a bottom of the order hitter. If Rocco was acquired, I'd prefer him in LF and Brian in CF. Gooch can leadoff. Scott is widely considered a leadoff hitter because he's fast (or used to be) and scrappy. Bull - Scott is a leadoff hitter because he most fits that bill on this team. Gooch can lead off either way - that's a beef you have with the manager - not the player

3- Rocco is locked down to an extremely reasonable contract through 2011.Not so...6mm, 8mm and 9mm? Reasonable? For that ****ty production? If he were on this team you'd be screaming bloody murder.

4- Rocco has progressed in his three years in the majors. His OPS, OPS+, and EQA have all increased every year. Scott is wildly inconsistent, and has had ONE above average offensive season in his entire career.

I'd take Scott's good years over Rocco's good years. Scotts bad years are not noticeably worse than Rocco's normal years. Check the numbers. Baldelli is mediocre.

How on earth does BA have a higher ceiling? They'll both be 25 on opening day, and Baldelli has already established himself as a solid player.

Brian was a better hitter in the minors at every level than Rocco. There is no reason to believe he won't be a better hitter in the majors after watching him in July and August when he was getting regular ABs.



Rocco is a .290/.329 hitter on his career. He's really not good. He'd cost BA + a pitching prospect. That would be completely a waste of talent.

If you dislike Scott Podsednik, there is nothing to like about Baldelli as a replacement for him. He costs more money per year, gets on base less, and would cost us two decent prospects to acquire.

Tragg
12-31-2006, 09:28 AM
Rocco is a .290/.329 hitter on his career. He's really not good. He'd cost BA + a pitching prospect. That would be completely a waste of talent.

If you dislike Scott Podsednik, there is nothing to like about Baldelli as a replacement for him. He costs more money per year, gets on base less, and would cost us two decent prospects to acquire.

Preach on.

Craig Grebeck
12-31-2006, 11:03 AM
Rocco is a .290/.329 hitter on his career. He's really not good. He'd cost BA + a pitching prospect. That would be completely a waste of talent.

He's 25. He's already played 2 and a half seasons in MLB. He's locked down to a reasonable contract (how that isn't reasonable relative to the market and his production is beyond me). He had a ridiculous power spike last season. There is no reason to believe he can't do it on a consistent basis.

Also, I'm not buying BA being a part of the deal. They want to shift Upton to CF, so I don't see a fit.

beck72
12-31-2006, 11:14 AM
I don't see Baldelli as a replacement for Pods as a leadoff hitter in 2007 [though the times he hit #1 with TB he did very well]. Baldelli hitting 7, 8 or 9 would give the bottom of the order a huge lift. Yet he is a .300 hitter. Anderson is a few yrs away from that kind of hitting, if ever. Brian has some big time holes in his swing, esp. when thrown offspeed stuff. Yet Brian has already answered questions about his ability to play major league defense.

If the sox did go after Baldelli--which would mean Brian would be gone--people complaining about how the sox are "writing off 2007" wouldn't have much ammunition left. Anderson could have a better career than Baldelli. But he's not likely to better what Baldelli can do for at least a few yrs

The major question is what the cost for Baldelli would be.

JB98
12-31-2006, 01:41 PM
When you're getting injured like Baldelli, it's not just bad luck, he's injury prone. For whatever reason, he tweaks/injures something all the time...sorry, but I don't want to watch him in and out from week to week. ESPECIALLY when we have to give up some prospects for him. I think we're better off standing pat.

Like I said, I'm always willing to trade prospects. You'd honestly rather have Luis Terrero on the 2007 Sox than Rocco Baldelli?

munchman33
12-31-2006, 02:38 PM
The major question is what the cost for Baldelli would be.

And I don't think a pitching prospect (as long as it isn't Danks) and Brian is too much to ask for a guy that so obviously fills a hole on this team.

oeo
12-31-2006, 02:39 PM
He's 25. He's already played 2 and a half seasons in MLB. He's locked down to a reasonable contract (how that isn't reasonable relative to the market and his production is beyond me). He had a ridiculous power spike last season. There is no reason to believe he can't do it on a consistent basis.

Also, I'm not buying BA being a part of the deal. They want to shift Upton to CF, so I don't see a fit.

He's also a huge injury risk. I'll say it again...he's not worth it. It's not going to happen, anyway, and I'm happy for that. This would be making a trade for the sake of making a trade.

Domeshot17
01-01-2007, 01:51 AM
I don't think he is THAT big of an injury risk. He had knee surgery, then got run out on turf, which is never a good combo. I think if you get him in an open air stadium and off turf and a dome, he will improve. I also think part of the reason he struggled was playing through his injuries and readjusting.

My problem is this, Baldelli and Anderson are the same age. If Anderson posted anywhere close to Baldelli's numbers over his entire season (Baldelli did it in 90 odd games) people would be even more high on Brian. Baldelli is almost as good if not as good of a defensive OF as Brian. He has a chance to end up GREAT. He has to become more patient at the plate, but at 25 years of age, its not like that is out of the question. He has a compact, complete swing that is nice to look at it. Brian on the other hand has that long, out of control, no idea what he is doing swing half the time. His approach is even worse.

I like Brian, but I find the idea that he can improve from a .230 hitter to a star at age 25 but Baldelli can't improve from a .290 hitter to a Very Good player at the same age completely foolish. I am as much of a homer as anyone else, but I would put money on Baldelli having the better career of the 2 when they both retire. Badelli is a great combo of speed and power. Brian has been told to find his identity, either speed or power, and hasn't proven to really possess either.

jabrch
01-01-2007, 02:16 AM
I don't think he is THAT big of an injury risk. He had knee surgery, then got run out on turf, which is never a good combo. I think if you get him in an open air stadium and off turf and a dome, he will improve. I also think part of the reason he struggled was playing through his injuries and readjusting.

My problem is this, Baldelli and Anderson are the same age. If Anderson posted anywhere close to Baldelli's numbers over his entire season (Baldelli did it in 90 odd games) people would be even more high on Brian. Baldelli is almost as good if not as good of a defensive OF as Brian. He has a chance to end up GREAT. He has to become more patient at the plate, but at 25 years of age, its not like that is out of the question. He has a compact, complete swing that is nice to look at it. Brian on the other hand has that long, out of control, no idea what he is doing swing half the time. His approach is even worse.

I like Brian, but I find the idea that he can improve from a .230 hitter to a star at age 25 but Baldelli can't improve from a .290 hitter to a Very Good player at the same age completely foolish. I am as much of a homer as anyone else, but I would put money on Baldelli having the better career of the 2 when they both retire. Badelli is a great combo of speed and power. Brian has been told to find his identity, either speed or power, and hasn't proven to really possess either.


Dome - look at what Baldelli did in the minors. He did the same thing he is doing now. He will never get on base much. He will never have much power. He will never be in BA's class defensively.

Domeshot17
01-01-2007, 02:57 AM
Baldelli is an amazing defensive CF. There is no question about that. Give him a year in the smaller OF we have, you would see he has the same range, almost as good of a first step, and a much better arm.

I agree, he may never be a super high OBP guy, but looking around the league, you generally don't find TOO many leadoff hitters who are OBP guys and SPEED guys. They tend to be one or the other and that is because Majority of lead off hitters with speed lack power, so pitchers challenge them. Guys like Damon who are a threat to hit 15-20 a year get more walks. Yes, Patience comes with it, but Patience is also something that is learned. I just think Baldelli has more of a chance of becoming a patient hitter then Anderson. He already is a better contact hitter with better power and better speed. He has a chance to be a 5 tool player, 20-20 player much like Grady Sizemore (more like a poor mans Sizemore). Anderson may have a chance to be a .280 hitter, but he is more of a 15-15 guy if that.

oeo
01-01-2007, 02:59 AM
I don't think he is THAT big of an injury risk. He had knee surgery, then got run out on turf, which is never a good combo. I think if you get him in an open air stadium and off turf and a dome, he will improve. I also think part of the reason he struggled was playing through his injuries and readjusting.

My problem is this, Baldelli and Anderson are the same age. If Anderson posted anywhere close to Baldelli's numbers over his entire season (Baldelli did it in 90 odd games) people would be even more high on Brian. Baldelli is almost as good if not as good of a defensive OF as Brian. He has a chance to end up GREAT. He has to become more patient at the plate, but at 25 years of age, its not like that is out of the question. He has a compact, complete swing that is nice to look at it. Brian on the other hand has that long, out of control, no idea what he is doing swing half the time. His approach is even worse.

I like Brian, but I find the idea that he can improve from a .230 hitter to a star at age 25 but Baldelli can't improve from a .290 hitter to a Very Good player at the same age completely foolish. I am as much of a homer as anyone else, but I would put money on Baldelli having the better career of the 2 when they both retire. Badelli is a great combo of speed and power. Brian has been told to find his identity, either speed or power, and hasn't proven to really possess either.

Who ever said Brian would be a star? He won't be a star, but we don't need him to be a star. If he can consistently put up a .260-.270 batting average, and continue to play great defense, that's fine. His power will improve in the upcoming years, as well.

Domeshot17
01-01-2007, 03:06 AM
Who ever said Brian would be a star? He won't be a star, but we don't need him to be a star. If he can consistently put up a .260-.270 batting average, and continue to play great defense, that's fine. His power will improve in the upcoming years, as well.

I agree, and if we are looking down the line of trying to build a team for the next 4-5 years, I would to love to see us grab Baldelli, then have him or brian in left and center with pods splitting time with both as the 4th OF (or LF if Brian continues to struggle), and when Pods is Phased out, we have an incredible young pluthera of OF in Fields Anderson Sweeney an Baldelli (and maybe Willie Harris V2.0 aka Jerry Owens). I just feel Baldelli could be the best of that bunch, and potentially fills the lead off hole very well.

beck72
01-01-2007, 08:35 AM
Dome - look at what Baldelli did in the minors. He did the same thing he is doing now. He will never get on base much. He will never have much power. He will never be in BA's class defensively.
Baldelli was also rushed through the minors. In 2002, he went to from high A to AAA as a 20 yr old--with only 166 AB's in AA and AAA combined before playing in TB in 2003.

While BA's and Baldelli's minor league numbers are similar, Rocco was 3-4 yrs younger than BA at those minor league stops. And Baldelli only struggled as an 18 and 19 yr old, which really skewed the overall numbers.

beck72
01-01-2007, 08:43 AM
Who ever said Brian would be a star? He won't be a star, but we don't need him to be a star. If he can consistently put up a .260-.270 batting average, and continue to play great defense, that's fine. His power will improve in the upcoming years, as well.
IMO, Brian should be able to hit for a .250-.260 avg in '07.

Yet the sox traded Chris Young because he didn't project to hit for avg. The sox need an OF who can consistently hit .290-.300 and play defense. Ba won't come near that for a few yrs if that.

The sox can upgrade the offense in only a few spots. CF is one of those. Expecting an upgrade from a .260-.270 hitter isn't out of the question. Esp if the sox won't hurt their defense with the added upgrade in offense.

maurice
01-02-2007, 02:30 PM
Anderson is an elite defensive player. Baldelli is not.
Anderson is likely to stay healthy. Baldelli is not.
Anderson is essentially free. Baldelli costs players in trade + millions of dollars.

Its surprising to see such an obsession with batting average in 2007. Anderson with a .260 AVE would have about the same OBP as Baldelli with a .300 AVE. They also have a similar power + speed combo.

For these reasons (especially the health reason), it is entirely reasonable to expect Anderson to be the more valuable player in 2007 and beyond.

That being said, I'll take Baldelli in the likely event that KW is unwilling to give up Anderson or a top young pitcher for him. We need another OF who can play CF this year.

UserNameBlank
01-02-2007, 03:17 PM
Anderson is an elite defensive player. Baldelli is not.
Anderson is likely to stay healthy. Baldelli is not.
Anderson is essentially free. Baldelli costs players in trade + millions of dollars.

Its surprising to see such an obsession with batting average in 2007. Anderson with a .260 AVE would have about the same OBP as Baldelli with a .300 AVE. They also have a similar power + speed combo.

For these reasons (especially the health reason), it is entirely reasonable to expect Anderson to be the more valuable player in 2007 and beyond.

That being said, I'll take Baldelli in the likely event that KW is unwilling to give up Anderson or a top young pitcher for him. We need another OF who can play CF this year.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

If TB wants a package for him similar to the type of package the Rockies wanted for Jennings (a top arm and a ML ready OF) the Sox should just get another starter instead. Either do that or do nothing, which at this point I would prefer.

Flight #24
01-02-2007, 03:18 PM
Anderson is an elite defensive player. Baldelli is not.
Anderson is likely to stay healthy. Baldelli is not.
Anderson is essentially free. Baldelli costs players in trade + millions of dollars.


IMO acquiring Baldelli is less about replacing Anderson and more about replacing Pods/Anderson. As high as I am on Brian and as productive as Pods was in '05, both played poorly in '06, particularly Scott (since BA was solid on D and improved with the bat over the year).

While not a true high-OBP leadoff guy, Baldelli would be serviceable and provide some power in the top spot, which while not a primary concern is a decent addition. That's if it looks like Pods '07 ~ Pods '06. And if Anderson '07 ~ Anderson early '06, Rocco could step in and be an upgrade in CF when factoring in O and D.

Plus, since he's still relatively young, it seems likely that Rocco will continue to add some power, making him a viable LF for future years to help offset a potential loss of Dye.

It's a move for the future and insurance for '07. How much that's worth is the question. I'd give up guys like Floyd/Phillips, but not Danks/Gio/Fields/Sweeney.

maurice
01-02-2007, 03:48 PM
Assuming for the sake of argument that you definitely keep Anderson, I agree that you have to consider both LF and CF in any discussion of Baldelli. That's why I want him. I was just responding to the posts that made head-to-head comparisons.

White Sox Randy
01-03-2007, 11:05 AM
If the Sox trade Anderson to add an outfielder than basically the Sox will have 2 OFers for next year. And, we all know that Kenny is not spending huge bucks on a FA. OFer after this season.

They need to add another solid OFer so that next year and beyond they will have Sweeney, Anderson, OFer "X" and a decent 4th.

They will almost surely lose Dye so how can they trade Anderson also ? They don't really want Pods.

If they did Kenny would need to be making a lot more moves with his outfield over the next couple of seasons.

I can really see Kenny wanting Baldelli but that doesn't mean that Tampa will take our offer.

I'd love it if we could get him for Floyd, Phillips and Logan.

I'd love an OF of Sweeney, Baldelli, Anderson and another athletic kid.

caulfield12
01-03-2007, 11:20 AM
For Floyd, Phillips and Logan?

NOT LIKELY. And no, you can't substitute Haeger for Floyd.

Now if you gave them a choice of Gio, Danks, Broadway (maybe) AND Fields or Sweeney (two prospects), that's what gets you Baldelli.

That's a HIGH cost, but time will tell whether it would have been worth it or not.

letsgosox15
01-03-2007, 11:50 AM
im sorry for all the levine lovers, but i cant stand the guy. he is always wrong about everything, and if he reports something its mostly just to get peoples hopes high or if it is true rumor we have been hearing for weeks. something is wrong with him. hes like mentally slow or something cause i dont think hes all there.

Tragg
01-03-2007, 11:54 AM
While not a true high-OBP leadoff guy, Baldelli would be serviceable and provide some power in the top spot, which while not a primary concern is a decent addition. That's if it looks like Pods '07 ~ Pods '06. And if Anderson '07 ~ Anderson early '06, Rocco could step in and be an upgrade in CF when factoring in O and D.
I agree with you.
Unfortunately, it appears that Tampa Bay has put a price tag on him as if he's an elite young hitter, not a merely serviceable one.
That's TB's problem - they need to trade players, but always over price them so that they don't do any trades until they are on the downside.

Save McCuddy's
01-03-2007, 12:22 PM
I'd love an OF of Sweeney, Baldelli, Anderson and another athletic kid.

An outfield with that little power would require Thome, Konerko, Crede and someone else to keep hitting alot of HR's.

maurice
01-03-2007, 01:19 PM
Now if you gave them a choice of Gio, Danks, Broadway (maybe) AND Fields or Sweeney (two prospects), that's what gets you Baldelli.

Tampa might ASK for that, but there's no way they'll actually get that much value in return for a guy who's always injured. They certainly won't get that much from KW.

russ99
01-04-2007, 02:56 PM
I'm sure Kenny will get a good backup CF/LF before spring training starts, since it's an obvious need and someone has to be brought in to replace Gload's hitting from the bench.