PDA

View Full Version : Dodgers / Padres interest in Dye


soxtalker
06-10-2007, 01:13 PM
This is a MLB Traderumors report (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/06/padres_dodgers_.html) based on a Ken Rosenthal (http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2007/06/rosenthals_late.html) video earlier this week and an LA Times piece (http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-bbline10jun10,1,4674878.story?coll=la-headlines-sports).

I'm not trying to make this any more than idle speculation based on what is probably some interest on the part of the two NL clubs. I am curious if anyone on the board knows anything about the players they name -- Jonathan Broxton, Chad Billingsley, Scott Linebrink, Clay Hensley and Chase Headley.

JohnTucker0814
06-10-2007, 01:26 PM
I'd be up for getting Broxton and a minor league prospect for Dye. Broxton is a heckuva set-up man to run out there in the 8th before Jenks. But I think we would need a pretty good prospect along with him for Dye.

JDsDirtySox
06-10-2007, 01:28 PM
The player we want is Chad Billingsley.

HawkDJ
06-10-2007, 01:37 PM
Out of all those I would think the Sox would have the most interest in Jonathan "big daddy" Broxton (checks in at almost 300 pounds). Seems to fit the Sox mold as a young very hard thrower. Also throws a hard sinker which I know the Sox love. He has yet to give up a home run this season.

Billingsley would also be attractive since he can be used as a starter in the future. But I doubt LA would give up either of the two. Baseball America listed the two as the Dodgers closer (Broxton) and #1 starter(Billingsley) of the future.

balke
06-10-2007, 02:00 PM
Out of all those I would think the Sox would have the most interest in Jonathan "big daddy" Broxton (checks in at almost 300 pounds). Seems to fit the Sox mold as a young very hard thrower. Also throws a hard sinker which I know the Sox love. He has yet to give up a home run this season.

Billingsley would also be attractive since he can be used as a starter in the future. But I doubt LA would give up either of the two. Baseball America listed the two as the Dodgers closer (Broxton) and #1 starter(Billingsley) of the future.

If they think they can get to the playoffs, I think they'll give us whatever we want for Jermaine Dye. The Dodgers are ready to play.

soxtalker
06-10-2007, 02:30 PM
...

Billingsley would also be attractive since he can be used as a starter in the future. But I doubt LA would give up either of the two. Baseball America listed the two as the Dodgers closer (Broxton) and #1 starter(Billingsley) of the future.

Well, it was mentioned in the LA Times article, though the way it was phrased made it simply sound like that would be the price KW would be asking.

UserNameBlank
06-10-2007, 02:40 PM
If we could get Billingsley for Dye I'd go nuts (in a good way). Then we could follow through with my following PS2 trade ideas:

Dye + Crede to LAD for SP Billingsley + SS Chin-Lung Hu
Vazquez + Masset to TOR for CF Alex Rios
Anderson + Egbert + Broadway to COL for CF Willy Taveras + prospect
Gio + Russel + Aardsma to TB for 2B BJ Upton
Contreras + Iguchi to NYM for SP Pelfrey
Floyd to PIT for RP Torres
Sign Buehrle and Garland to longterm extensions. 5 years? No problem.

Then we'd have this team:

R Taveras RF
L Sweeney LF
R Rios CF
L Thome DH
R Konerko 1B
L Pierzynski C
R Upton 2B
R Fields 3B
R Hu SS

SP Buehrle
SP Garland
SP Danks
SP Billingsley
SP Pelfrey

Pen: Jenks-Thornton-MacDougal-Day-Logan-Torres

...and after that we could spin our other minor leaguers (what's left of them) for low-level prospects with high ceilings in other rip-off deals. And then we can take those prospects we get from more rip-offs and package them with one one of our 3-5 starters for another ace.

soxtalker
06-10-2007, 02:46 PM
...
...and after that we could spin our other minor leaguers (what's left of them) for low-level prospects with high ceilings in other rip-off deals. And then we can take those prospects we get from more rip-offs and package them with one one of our 3-5 starters for another ace.

This may seem like a really silly question, but what exactly do you mean by a "rip-off deal"?

UserNameBlank
06-10-2007, 02:51 PM
This may seem like a really silly question, but what exactly do you mean by a "rip-off deal"?
Like common PS2 trades. For example, we send Heath Phillips to Team A for a toolsy CF prospect who's struggling in High-A. Then we do the same thing with Haeger, then when these toolsy prospects we got in rip-offs come around, we package them and get an All-Star for essentially two 5th starters. Now, there are some obvious holes in this logic, but hey, that's what PS2's are for.

Brian26
06-10-2007, 11:05 PM
Then we'd have this team:
......
...and after that we could spin our other minor leaguers (what's left of them).

Precisely. You've traded Gio, Masset, Broadway and Floyd. Might as well shut the Charlotte franchise down.

ChiSox4Life
06-10-2007, 11:33 PM
I actually went to high school with Chad Billingsley and his senior year while on varsity, I was on the junior varsity team. He is really legit (not being biased) He is young athletic and has a great arm! He is a guy who can spend another year or 2 in the bullpen, but he needs to be in a starting rotation. Out of the players listed we definitely want Billingsley!!

palehozenychicty
06-10-2007, 11:48 PM
I would take any of the Dodgers young prospects, including Broxton and Billingsley. Those guys are going to be good. Real good.

Jjav829
06-10-2007, 11:48 PM
:worship: Chad Billingsley

I'd like to see him come to the Sox in any trade with the Dodgers. And Andre Ethier. And Matt Kemp. And Russell Martin (Ok, not realistic). And, yes, I like the Dodgers young players. :smile:

DSpivack
06-11-2007, 12:06 AM
:worship: Chad Billingsley

I'd like to see him come to the Sox in any trade with the Dodgers. And Andre Ethier. And Matt Kemp. And Russell Martin (Ok, not realistic). And, yes, I like the Dodgers young players. :smile:

Martin is quickly becoming one of my favorite young players in the game (of course, he is my C for both of my fantasy teams).

CWSpalehoseCWS
06-11-2007, 12:45 AM
I think it's safe to say that the Dodgers have many players that would be worth trying to get.

Flight #24
06-11-2007, 10:21 AM
FWLIW, I have a BoSox fan buddy who says there are Beantown rumblings about making a play for JD, enabling them to shift Drew to CF and dump Coco.

That scares me a bit because IIRC, Coco is a guy that Kenny's been linked to in the past and even though he sucks, he could fit the "Kenny gets his man" and "go get undervalued guys who we can turn around" schools of thought.

What I like though is the possible addition of another major player to the competition if indeed LA & SF/SD are interested. And there are supposedly a couple of high-ceiling guys in CF Jacob Ellsbury and SP Clay Buchholz in the Boston system.

Or use the Boston interest to get the Spankees to cough up Jose Tabata and Humberto Sanchez.

UserNameBlank
06-11-2007, 10:56 AM
FWLIW, I have a BoSox fan buddy who says there are Beantown rumblings about making a play for JD, enabling them to shift Drew to CF and dump Coco.

That scares me a bit because IIRC, Coco is a guy that Kenny's been linked to in the past and even though he sucks, he could fit the "Kenny gets his man" and "go get undervalued guys who we can turn around" schools of thought.

What I like though is the possible addition of another major player to the competition if indeed LA & SF/SD are interested. And there are supposedly a couple of high-ceiling guys in CF Jacob Ellsbury and SP Clay Buchholz in the Boston system.

Or use the Boston interest to get the Spankees to cough up Jose Tabata and Humberto Sanchez.
Yeah, no interest in Coco here either.

If we can somehow get Billingsley for Dye than we should do it, right now, no regrets. Screw trying to negotiate with other teams. Billingsley still can become a frontline starter and IMO is a better option than several of the other SP the Dodgers have already.

Speaking of the Dodgers pitching staff, I wouldn't mind checking to see if they'd want one more top of the rotation starter for the playoffs in Contreras. Maybe we throw him and Crede in to pick up something like Billingsley, Broxton, Hu, Brazoban, and a prospect. That's a pretty big deal, but they would be getting Contreras and Crede for beyond next year, plus draft picks if they didn't re-sign Dye, and we'd have another relief project in Brazoban, a young high-ceiling starter ready right now in Billingsley, a future closer in Broxton, and a future SS in Hu who could start next year. Meanwhile the Dodgers all of the sudden are the immediate WS favorites out of the NL.

Again, that's a pretty big deal, but on the surface obviously looks much better than the last white flag trade.

Flight #24
06-11-2007, 11:04 AM
Speaking of the Dodgers pitching staff, I wouldn't mind checking to see if they'd want one more top of the rotation starter for the playoffs in Contreras.

That's actually one of the big thngs I think Kenny ought to be doing right now: shopping Contreras (or possibly Vazquez). Danks is a keeper and should be fine as the #4 next year. The Sox have a plethora of young arms, one of whom should be ready to slot in as the #5 next year: Haeger, Gio, Broadway, maybe even Sisco or Masset (or Billingsley). What they lack is an ace.

Dealing Contreras, even for cents on the dollar frees up $10M. That lets you give Buehrle $16-17M and use the rest on an offensive player, which the Sox will need. And I believe Jose is already or is about to begin to decline so I'm not sold that there's a huge dropoff from him to a youngster. Long-term, you'd lock in Burls & Garland at the top of the rotation, keep Javy for a couple years, and let your youngsters grow into their slots in the 4-5 (and then 3-5).

Contreras makes sense for a team trying to win a title this year or next. I'm not sure that 1-2 more years of Jose is better than resigning Buehrle though.

balke
06-11-2007, 11:06 AM
I think one big problem Kenny is facing is what he would do without Dye. What's the point of adding Billingsley if your outfield is going to be Pods/Erstad/Sweeney/Terrero/Owens?

Not only can they not hit for power, 2 of 4 are injury prone.

The Immigrant
06-11-2007, 11:12 AM
Contreras makes sense for a team trying to win a title this year or next. I'm not sure that 1-2 more years of Jose is better than resigning Buehrle though.

I believe that Jose has a no trade clause that runs through the end of this season. He's more likely to be an off-season move.

jabrch
06-11-2007, 11:47 AM
If we could send Dye to LA for Billingsley and Broxton, I am guessing KW would do it in a freaking heartbeat. That would free up money to go after Ichiro for next year. I'm guessing it would also be the first move in a massive dump that would send Buehrle packing, probably for a single top tier prospect to somewhere - with Danks and possibly Gio next year, I am not sure we will want three LHP starting.

Either way - Billingsley and Broxton for JD would be a steal for us.

SBSoxFan
06-11-2007, 11:54 AM
If we could send Dye to LA for Billingsley and Broxton, I am guessing KW would do it in a freaking heartbeat. That would free up money to go after Ichiro for next year. I'm guessing it would also be the first move in a massive dump that would send Buehrle packing, probably for a single top tier prospect to somewhere - with Danks and possibly Gio next year, I am not sure we will want three LHP starting.

Either way - Billingsley and Broxton for JD would be a steal for us.

How does trading Dye free up money for next year? Unless the Sox resign him, he's off the books next year anyway.

UserNameBlank
06-11-2007, 12:07 PM
If we could send Dye to LA for Billingsley and Broxton, I am guessing KW would do it in a freaking heartbeat. That would free up money to go after Ichiro for next year. I'm guessing it would also be the first move in a massive dump that would send Buehrle packing, probably for a single top tier prospect to somewhere - with Danks and possibly Gio next year, I am not sure we will want three LHP starting.

Either way - Billingsley and Broxton for JD would be a steal for us.
Colletti might get run out of town for dealing Billingsley and Broxton to us for a couple months of Dye. Billingsley for Dye straight up could be a steal as it is.

soxtalker
06-11-2007, 02:59 PM
If we could send Dye to LA for Billingsley and Broxton, I am guessing KW would do it in a freaking heartbeat. That would free up money to go after Ichiro for next year. I'm guessing it would also be the first move in a massive dump that would send Buehrle packing, probably for a single top tier prospect to somewhere - with Danks and possibly Gio next year, I am not sure we will want three LHP starting.

Either way - Billingsley and Broxton for JD would be a steal for us.

If you look at the LA Times article, there was an "OR" between those two names -- not an "AND". So, what if it was only one of them?

jabrch
06-11-2007, 03:01 PM
How does trading Dye free up money for next year? Unless the Sox resign him, he's off the books next year anyway.

The options are to trade him, let him go, or resign him. Two of those free up money, the other committs more money.

If you look at the LA Times article, there was an "OR" between those two names -- not an "AND". So, what if it was only one of them?

Then we still look into it. (and we'd take Billingsley if we had our choice)

CWSpalehoseCWS
06-11-2007, 04:38 PM
The options are to trade him, let him go, or resign him. Two of those free up money, the other committs more money.

Money that should be put towards keeping Buehrle.

MRM
06-11-2007, 05:10 PM
Money that should be put towards keeping Buehrle.

The Sox have serious bullpen problems, outfield needs, possibly needs at 2B and 3B and all anyone is concered with is re-signing a starting pitcher to a monster contract? that is the ONE area the team doesn't have a need, with or without Buehrle. Hasn't anyone learned anything from the start to this season? It DOESN'T MATTER how good your starting pitching is if you can't hit and your relief corp can't get anyone out.

Forget about throwing nearly 20% of your payroll at ONE pitcher when you have so many more important holes to fill with that money. Or are you content being a .500 team with a nice left handed ace?

balke
06-11-2007, 05:48 PM
The Sox have serious bullpen problems, outfield needs, possibly needs at 2B and 3B and all anyone is concered with is re-signing a starting pitcher to a monster contract? that is the ONE area the team doesn't have a need, with or without Buehrle. Hasn't anyone learned anything from the start to this season? It DOESN'T MATTER how good your starting pitching is if you can't hit and your relief corp can't get anyone out.

Forget about throwing nearly 20% of your payroll at ONE pitcher when you have so many more important holes to fill with that money. Or are you content being a .500 team with a nice left handed ace?


Obviously you weren't around in 2004 to know what a team is like with a whole in the pitching staff. Good cheap relievers can be acquired in free agency much easier than a starter.

DSpivack
06-11-2007, 05:57 PM
Obviously you weren't around in 2004 to know what a team is like with a whole in the pitching staff. Good cheap relievers can be acquired in free agency much easier than a starter.

Show me these magical relievers that are reliable year in and year out, get the job done, and are cheap. Starters tend to be much more consistent than relief pitchers; the bullpen is usually the hardest thing to build in forming a winning team. In 2005 the Sox got lucky and got three career years from relievers, in Hermanson, Cotts, and Politte.

getonbckthr
06-11-2007, 06:01 PM
Money that should be put towards keeping Buehrle.
I love Burls but how do you justify giving him 17 million a year?

seventyseven
06-11-2007, 06:17 PM
I love Burls but how do you justify giving him 17 million a year?

He is NOT going to get $17MM per year. I would be flabbergasted if he got even close to that.

More like $12-13MM.

Flight #24
06-11-2007, 06:25 PM
I love Burls but how do you justify giving him 17 million a year?

Simple. Because that's the going rate for a #1 or top-tier #2 caliber guy and the Sox aren't going to find one cheaper. Oh yeah, and because he's the best pitcher they have, so the rotation would take a hit by letting him walk.

I'm all for redistributing if it makes sense, as it did in 2005 when you found Iguchi, AJ, Dye at significant discounts. But with SPs, the bottom line is that you're not going to get a guy cheaper who's anywhere near as good. Adam Eaton, Ted Lilly, etc are what you'd get for $10M, and a Javy Vazquez is what you'd get for $13. You want a Buehrle-caliber guy, you'd better pay for him or develop a new one. And the Sox don't have one ready to step in.

The only way I think you don't resign Mark is if you're going to spend the same money (or more) on another player - either a different pitcher you think is better or on a position player. (Of course, the Sox may not agree.)

And to 77: Have you been paying attention to the pitching market of late? $12-13M is Vazquez/Marquis/Lilly money. Do you honestly think Buehrle isn't going to get more than that?

balke
06-11-2007, 06:44 PM
And to 77: Have you been paying attention to the pitching market of late? $12-13M is Vazquez/Marquis/Lilly money. Do you honestly think Buehrle isn't going to get more than that?

13.5-16.5 mil. That's probably what Mark will get. I see a 3 year deal that starts low and ends at a high #, the avg. of which will be 14-15 million.

MRM
06-11-2007, 06:52 PM
He is NOT going to get $17MM per year. I would be flabbergasted if he got even close to that.

More like $12-13MM.

You think he's going to get Javier Vazquez type money? ROFL. He turned down flat an extension along those figures last year, you think he's going to settle for that in THIS F.A. market? Keep dreaming.

Vazquez got $11.5mm
Schmidt got $15.75mm
Petitte got $16mm
Zito got $18mm

MB is going to get a helluva lot more than $12-$13mm. You can start the bidding at 5 years/$15mm and go up from there. Probably way up.

soxtalker
06-11-2007, 06:56 PM
I don't think that money is the big issue. (It's an issue -- just not the biggest issue.) KW is in the midst of a season in which several of his veteran players have gone out for various amounts of time due to injury. As durable as Buerhle is, signing him for 4-5 years is a major risk.

Tragg
06-11-2007, 06:57 PM
Dye + Crede to LAD for SP Billingsley + SS Chin-Lung Hu
Vazquez + Masset to TOR for CF Alex Rios
Anderson + Egbert + Broadway to COL for CF Willy Taveras + prospect
Gio + Russel + Aardsma to TB for 2B BJ Upton
Contreras + Iguchi to NYM for SP Pelfrey
Floyd to PIT for RP Torres
Sign Buehrle and Garland to longterm extensions. 5 years? No problem.

Then we'd have this team:

R Taveras RF
L Sweeney LF
R Rios CF
L Thome DH
R Konerko 1B
L Pierzynski C
R Upton 2B
R Fields 3B
R Hu SS

SP Buehrle
SP Garland
SP Danks
SP Billingsley
SP Pelfrey

Pen: Jenks-Thornton-MacDougal-Day-Logan-Torres


First, How can you just pencil Billingsley and Pelfey as starting pitchers? They may be able to or may not. I don't know about Billingsley, but there's no way Pelfrey's "can't miss". He didn't pitch well earlier in the majors and my personal opinoin is that he's counterfeit - that's my opinion, but I've seen him pitch several times in person and on TV. Whether I'm right or wrong, too much youth to expect to contend.

Taveras is having a nice year, but what is reality? 2007 or 2006/05 when his numbers aren't very good?. Same with Rios. Might be buying really high on these 2 (the Astros were selling TAveras cheap in the offseason, because they knew that the superior Pence was ready). That's a really power-weak outfield with Taveras, Sweeney and Rios.

Interesting ideas, though. Faster and younger.
And I'm not trying to beat on you - I figured if you posted an idea, it was fair game to tear apart (or to attempt to).

MRM
06-11-2007, 07:03 PM
13.5-16.5 mil. That's probably what Mark will get. I see a 3 year deal that starts low and ends at a high #, the avg. of which will be 14-15 million.

No way he does a 3 yr deal for 14-15. Marks career practically mirrors Zitos. Zito got 7 years at 18m per. Why on earth would MB settle for 4 fewer years at 3-4 mil less per year? He's going to get at least a 4 year deal and at least 15mil per. Probably more years or more $$.

balke
06-11-2007, 08:36 PM
No way he does a 3 yr deal for 14-15. Marks career practically mirrors Zitos. Zito got 7 years at 18m per. Why on earth would MB settle for 4 fewer years at 3-4 mil less per year? He's going to get at least a 4 year deal and at least 15mil per. Probably more years or more $$.

The careers aren't mirrored. Zito has Cy Young and 23 wins in a season on his resume.

I'm a big pitching fan right now. Buehrle is our best, and to me has the brightest future ahead of him. I am hoping the Sox pony up, and I hope for one of those 7 year deals, looks like it'll be a bargain at 16 mil if the market keeps inflating.

UserNameBlank
06-11-2007, 10:16 PM
First, How can you just pencil Billingsley and Pelfey as starting pitchers? They may be able to or may not. I don't know about Billingsley, but there's no way Pelfrey's "can't miss". He didn't pitch well earlier in the majors and my personal opinoin is that he's counterfeit - that's my opinion, but I've seen him pitch several times in person and on TV. Whether I'm right or wrong, too much youth to expect to contend.

Taveras is having a nice year, but what is reality? 2007 or 2006/05 when his numbers aren't very good?. Same with Rios. Might be buying really high on these 2 (the Astros were selling TAveras cheap in the offseason, because they knew that the superior Pence was ready). That's a really power-weak outfield with Taveras, Sweeney and Rios.

Interesting ideas, though. Faster and younger.
And I'm not trying to beat on you - I figured if you posted an idea, it was fair game to tear apart (or to attempt to).
Everything is fair game. Besides, these are just my PS2 ideads anyway.

Rios IMO is the player that would be the safest bet of any. He put up a line of .302/.349/.516 last year in his breakout and so far as followed up with a lone of .289/.341/.526. Plus he hit 17 homers last year and already has 14 this year. I don't think he'll ever be a 40-HR guy like Wells can be, but he is a 30-HR man for sure IMO and I think he'll be a better offensive player than Wells because I think he'll be much more consistent over his career. Rios is also a CF. The only reason he's in RF right now is because he's blocked by one of the best CF's in the game in Vernon Wells. He has good speed too.

Taveras has never really had bad numbers. He's hit well since he's come up (.289 career) and has a career .335 OBP. Obviously he has the speed, although he'll never steal as many as Pods did with the Brewers, but unlike Pods he is a real CF, he has an arm, he's injury free, and he's consistent year to year. About the Astros selling him low, they sent Taveras and Hirsch with a reliever to the Rockies for what could be one year of Jason Jennings. That is more the Astros way overpaying for a player than anything else. When the Garland rumors were swirling, that would have made an adequate package. But for Jennings? No way. I think they'll regret that trade much sooner than later.

Sweeney I think we'll hit for some power in a couple of years, but until then he could probably adjust to hitting second or at the bottom of the lineup. And yes, that's not a lot of power overall, but in 2 years that OF could get you about 50 HR per season. Ideally, most of the power would be coming from 1B (Konerko), DH (Thome, other pickup via trade of FA), and 3B (Fields). So you could have 4 guys including Rios in the lineup capable of hitting 30 HR's, although obviously with Fields who knows how long it will take him to develop that, if he even can. I do think he'll come along offensively a lot quicker than Crede did.

Billingsley is going to be a stud IMO. Pelfrey I honeslty haven't seen much of except a scouting video from behind the plate which is hard to tell much off of and some highlights. But everyone looks good in highlights. Mainly I just go by what has been said about him. That and the fact that the Mets need pitching and it seems unlikely they would give up Humber who is typically thought of as the better of the two. But who knows if the Mets would even look to deal young pitching, I was just throwing something out there. If there is a better option available and KW takes the rebuilding route - which he absolutely HAS to right now - I have faith that Kenny will make the right deal.

A. Cavatica
06-11-2007, 10:59 PM
Almost anyone on the roster will be available for the right price, but I think the Sox would love to keep Dye. His off year might bring the price down. If they could trade Konerko and sign Dye for similar money, that would be huge.

I think Crede is as good as gone because of Fields, Boras, and refusing to have offseason back surgery. Unfortunately, Crede won't bring much in trade now. (How does the draft formula work? How are the Type A free agents determined?)

I think Contreras will be dealt before the trade deadline (in part, to free up money for Buehrle) and Buehrle will leave as a free agent (because he's going to get a huge deal).

DickAllen72
06-11-2007, 11:24 PM
Almost anyone on the roster will be available for the right price, but I think the Sox would love to keep Dye. His off year might bring the price down. If they could trade Konerko and sign Dye for similar money, that would be huge.

If Dye can learn to play a good defensive first base (I think he can), that might not be a bad option for the Sox, provided they get a good return for Konerko. Unfortunately, I don't see the Sox trading their "Captain" however. But you never know.

Flight #24
06-11-2007, 11:58 PM
I think Contreras will be dealt before the trade deadline (in part, to free up money for Buehrle) and Buehrle will leave as a free agent (because he's going to get a huge deal).

I don't see Kenny dealing Jose unless he's either a)very confident he can resign Mark and/or b)entering a serious rebuilding - i.e. not competing in 2008. I just don't see him going into 2008 with only 2 veteran SPs.

A. Cavatica
06-12-2007, 12:16 AM
I don't see Kenny dealing Jose unless he's either a)very confident he can resign Mark and/or b)entering a serious rebuilding - i.e. not competing in 2008. I just don't see him going into 2008 with only 2 veteran SPs.

Next year, Danks will be a veteran SP, so that's three. And of course there's Floyd.

We all know KW's determined to move another starter (witness almost trading Garland last winter) and Contreras's value will be highest at the deadline (old, lots of big game experience, not so expensive as to ruin next year's budget). Reclaiming his salary will let KW offer Buehrle more, but I think the Sox drop out when the bidding reaches 4/60.

StillMissOzzie
06-12-2007, 12:18 AM
He is NOT going to get $17MM per year. I would be flabbergasted if he got even close to that.

More like $12-13MM.

And I think that it's a good thing that you'll have several months to get used to being flabbergasted.Hell, I'm already on record as sayibg that the Sox' last, best, and final offer s/be 4 yrs/$65M, and I don't know if that is enough to get MB to forgoe the FA process.

But back to JD, it might be to the benefit of the Sox if the NL wildcard comes from the NL East, if only to get the Dodgers & Padres bidding each other up in pursuit of the NL West title as the sole playoff spot from that division.

SMO
:gulp:

lakeviewsoxfan
06-12-2007, 12:31 AM
Mark should be offered a 4/60MM with a team option for a 5th and 6th year at 15MM per year. 6yr 90MM toatl if he fulfills his entire contract, with 60mm Guaranteed.

oeo
06-12-2007, 12:33 AM
If Dye can learn to play a good defensive first base (I think he can), that might not be a bad option for the Sox, provided they get a good return for Konerko. Unfortunately, I don't see the Sox trading their "Captain" however. But you never know.

First of all, there's no way Dye goes for less than 12 per year. Secondly, Konerko is both younger and a better hitter than Dye, so I'll pass on paying more to Dye. Konerko will be 34 when his contract ends; Dye would be around 38 or 39...no deal.

A. Cavatica
06-12-2007, 01:00 AM
First of all, there's no way Dye goes for less than 12 per year. Secondly, Konerko is both younger and a better hitter than Dye, so I'll pass on paying more to Dye. Konerko will be 34 when his contract ends; Dye would be around 38 or 39...no deal.

Konerko may be a slightly better hitter, but they're pretty close, and Dye's career highs are actually better. And while Konerko's a year younger, Dye is the better athlete and plays younger. Dye plays a more demanding position and is not a liability on the basepaths, so I think he'll have a longer career. If they cost the same, there's no question Dye would be the better investment.

Heck, Dye played short a couple years ago. Playing a harder position on the "defensive spectrum" -- isn't that the mark of a great defensive player?

oeo
06-12-2007, 01:19 AM
Konerko may be a slightly better hitter, but they're pretty close, and Dye's career highs are actually better. And while Konerko's a year younger, Dye is the better athlete and plays younger. Dye plays a more demanding position and is not a liability on the basepaths, so I think he'll have a longer career. If they cost the same, there's no question Dye would be the better investment.

Dye is two years older than Konerko. He's shown signs of declining; he's not even as quick as he was two years ago. He doesn't play top notch defense in RF like he used to, and he definitely won't be able to do it 5 years down the line. I think Konerko not only will give you better stats, but we can cut him loose in three years when he's only 34. OTOH, Dye would likely get a 5 year contract himself, and we will not be able to cut him loose until he's 38, when he'll likely be slow as a sloth like Konerko.

Not to mention we have outfielders nearing their time as big league players. I don't understand why people suddenly want Konerko out of town. You people are crazy...

Man Soo Lee
06-12-2007, 01:20 AM
Konerko may be a slightly better hitter, but they're pretty close, and Dye's career highs are actually better. And while Konerko's a year younger, Dye is the better athlete and plays younger. Dye plays a more demanding position and is not a liability on the basepaths, so I think he'll have a longer career. If they cost the same, there's no question Dye would be the better investment.

Maybe his knee injury explains his declining range, but Dye has played poorly in the outfield this year. He can't be given credit for playing a more demanding position unless he can at least be adequate out there.

A. Cavatica
06-12-2007, 01:32 AM
Dye is two years older than Konerko. He's shown signs of declining; he's not even as quick as he was two years ago. He doesn't play top notch defense in RF like he used to, and he definitely won't be able to do it 5 years down the line. I think Konerko not only will give you better stats, but we can cut him loose in three years when he's only 34. OTOH, Dye would likely get a 5 year contract himself, and we will not be able to cut him loose until he's 38, when he'll likely be slow as a sloth like Konerko.

Not to mention we have outfielders nearing their time as big league players. I don't understand why people suddenly want Konerko out of town. You people are crazy...

One year, three months, and twenty-odd days, but who's counting?

Dye running on his hands is still faster than Konerko. I'll grant you that five years is too many for Dye, however. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

oeo
06-12-2007, 01:38 AM
One year, three months, and twenty-odd days, but who's counting?

Dye running on his hands is still faster than Konerko. I'll grant you that five years is too many for Dye, however. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

I'm counting...Dye was born January 28, 1974, Konerko on March 5, 1976. Two years plus some.

I don't care how slow Konerko is; two years ago he hit 40 homeruns with practically no protection. The only time Dye has hit more than 33, he had both Konerko and Thome in the same lineup.

A. Cavatica
06-12-2007, 01:47 AM
I'm counting...Dye was born January 28, 1974, Konerko on March 5, 1976. Two years plus some.

Crud, I was subtracting their major league debuts. :redface:

You win this one, OEO, but IIRC Dye did hit 78 home runs one year. :rolleyes:

MRM
06-12-2007, 01:58 AM
First of all, there's no way Dye goes for less than 12 per year.

12 what? Million? ROFL. Not a freakin chance he gets that kind of scratch.

MRM
06-12-2007, 02:03 AM
OTOH, Dye would likely get a 5 year contract himself, and we will not be able to cut him loose until he's 38, when he'll likely be slow as a sloth like Konerko.

This is as silly as the claim he's going to get 12mil per.

Jermaine will be LUCKY to get 3 years with an option year and a range of 7-8mil per. Teams don't give contracts based solely on your career year, they give them based on your entire body of work. IF he repeated last seasons career year again this year he'd be in for a bigger pay day, but that obviously isn't happening.

oeo
06-12-2007, 03:48 AM
This is as silly as the claim he's going to get 12mil per.

Jermaine will be LUCKY to get 3 years with an option year and a range of 7-8mil per. Teams don't give contracts based solely on your career year, they give them based on your entire body of work. IF he repeated last seasons career year again this year he'd be in for a bigger pay day, but that obviously isn't happening.

Did you see where the market went over the offseason? Dye isn't some trash that just had a career year...he's going to get more than 7-8 million. That's what he's getting right now and in this market it comes at a hell of a bargain. You're dreaming if you think we can get him that cheap again.

DSpivack
06-12-2007, 02:25 PM
This is as silly as the claim he's going to get 12mil per.

Jermaine will be LUCKY to get 3 years with an option year and a range of 7-8mil per. Teams don't give contracts based solely on your career year, they give them based on your entire body of work. IF he repeated last seasons career year again this year he'd be in for a bigger pay day, but that obviously isn't happening.

Adrian Beltre.

russ99
06-12-2007, 03:56 PM
If we could send Dye to LA for Billingsley and Broxton, I am guessing KW would do it in a freaking heartbeat. That would free up money to go after Ichiro for next year. I'm guessing it would also be the first move in a massive dump that would send Buehrle packing, probably for a single top tier prospect to somewhere - with Danks and possibly Gio next year, I am not sure we will want three LHP starting.

Either way - Billingsley and Broxton for JD would be a steal for us.

We have enough starter prospects who may or may not turn out to be good major league starters. I'd rather see the Sox go for Linebrink and a backup outfielder. Maybe Mike Cameron's also available, but Linebrink is probably too valuable to flip in a rental-for-rental deal. Still, how desperate are the Pads for a legitimate power hitter?

1917
06-12-2007, 04:05 PM
Adrian Beltre.

Jared Wright....granted it was far less then Beltre, but the guy was damn near out of baseball..a middle reliever, had a break out comeback for ATL in 2004, got 24 mil from NY...not earned his money since.
While we are at it with NYC pitching and one year wonders....Carl Pavano had one good year and banked heavy too.....
I know both of these guys got hurt, but they are proof, along with Beltre, that one great year can bring in the $$$

MRM
06-12-2007, 04:40 PM
Did you see where the market went over the offseason? Dye isn't some trash that just had a career year...he's going to get more than 7-8 million. That's what he's getting right now and in this market it comes at a hell of a bargain. You're dreaming if you think we can get him that cheap again.

His White Sox contract was 2 years 10mil with a 6mil option for this year that got bumped to 7mil with incentives for winning a silver slugger and finishing 5th in MVP voting. Basically he's coming off a 3-yr $17mil deal (a little more than 5.5mil per year that probably accurately reflects his worth at this point in his career) and has had one great season and two decent ones in the last 5 years. He'll be 34 years old before the start of next season, is struggling mightily this year, and has lost range and speed in the field.

Let's not pretend Dye is one of the better outfielders or hitters in the game. He's not. He had a career year last year that far exceeded anything he's ever done previously or is likely to ever do again. He's a career .274 hitter with decent power (although he's only exceeded 30 HRs 3 times in his 11 year career) at an age when most players begin a serious downward slide.

He'll be LUCKY to get 7-8mil BECAUSE the market is inflated. If he doesn't pick it up a LOT between now and the end of they year he won't get anywhere near that much.

MRM
06-12-2007, 04:43 PM
Adrian Beltre.

Bad example. Beltre was only 25 years old, just reaching the average peak years for a player. It was a safe bet he would continue to improve. Dye will be 34, reaching the average age where hitters start a serious decline.

MRM
06-12-2007, 04:47 PM
Jared Wright....granted it was far less then Beltre, but the guy was damn near out of baseball..a middle reliever, had a break out comeback for ATL in 2004, got 24 mil from NY...not earned his money since.
While we are at it with NYC pitching and one year wonders....Carl Pavano had one good year and banked heavy too.....
I know both of these guys got hurt, but they are proof, along with Beltre, that one great year can bring in the $$$

Again. Wright and Pavano were both 28 when they signed those deals. An age where a player "should" be in his prime. Dye will be 34. Apples and Oranges.

UserNameBlank
06-12-2007, 04:48 PM
Jared Wright....granted it was far less then Beltre, but the guy was damn near out of baseball..a middle reliever, had a break out comeback for ATL in 2004, got 24 mil from NY...not earned his money since.
While we are at it with NYC pitching and one year wonders....Carl Pavano had one good year and banked heavy too.....
I know both of these guys got hurt, but they are proof, along with Beltre, that one great year can bring in the $$$
Paul Byrd was very similar. Jared Weaver IIRC got a large one year deal from Seattle because of a few starts for St. Louis despite a terrible, terrible stint in LA. And the list goes on.

His White Sox contract was 2 years 10mil with a 6mil option for this year that got bumped to 7mil with incentives for winning a silver slugger and finishing 5th in MVP voting. Basically he's coming off a 3-yr $17mil deal (a little more than 5.5mil per year that probably accurately reflects his worth at this point in his career) and has had one great season and two decent ones in the last 5 years. He'll be 34 years old before the start of next season, is struggling mightily this year, and has lost range and speed in the field.

Let's not pretend Dye is one of the better outfielders or hitters in the game. He's not. He had a career year last year that far exceeded anything he's ever done previously or is likely to ever do again. He's a career .274 hitter with decent power (although he's only exceeded 30 HRs 3 times in his 11 year career) at an age when most players begin a serious downward slide.

He'll be LUCKY to get 7-8mil BECAUSE the market is inflated. If he doesn't pick it up a LOT between now and the end of they year he won't get anywhere near that much.

How much you want to bet that JD gets $8mil or less? We should do a sig bet or something. If he gets over 8mil per year you have to make a sig that says you love Billy Beane, and if he gets 8mil or less you can have me make any sig you like. Deal?

MRM
06-12-2007, 04:50 PM
Paul Byrd was very similar. Jared Weaver IIRC got a large one year deal from Seattle because of a few starts for St. Louis despite a terrible, terrible stint in LA. And the list goes on.



How much you want to bet that JD gets $8mil or less? We should do a sig bet or something. If he gets over 8mil per year you have to make a sig that says you love Billy Beane, and if he gets 8mil or less you can have me make any sig you like. Deal?

Sure, I take that bet :D:

UserNameBlank
06-12-2007, 04:53 PM
Sure, I take that bet :D:
Sweet! We're on.

DSpivack
06-12-2007, 04:59 PM
Paul Byrd was very similar. Jared Weaver IIRC got a large one year deal from Seattle because of a few starts for St. Louis despite a terrible, terrible stint in LA. And the list goes on.

I didn't know he was on the Mariners. :tongue:

The Immigrant
06-12-2007, 05:00 PM
Bad example. Beltre was only 25 years old, just reaching the average peak years for a player. It was a safe bet he would continue to improve. Dye will be 34, reaching the average age where hitters start a serious decline.

Beltre is also a 3B, a position that is much harder to fill than RF, and unlike Dye he had his career year right before signing the obscene deal.

MRM
06-12-2007, 05:12 PM
Beltre is also a 3B, a position that is much harder to fill than RF, and unlike Dye he had his career year right before signing the obscene deal.

In another thread people were speculating Rowand, who is also going to be a F.A., will command between 5-7 mil. AAron is 4 years younger than Dye, is a much better outfielder, has a higher career BA and only slightly lower career OPS than Dye and is actually having a very good year at the bat, unlike Jermaine.

I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this, but why on earth would people think Rowand will "only" get 5-7mm while Dye will command 12mm+?

UserNameBlank
06-12-2007, 05:42 PM
I didn't know he was on the Mariners. :tongue:
Whoops...

Anyway, Jeff is hanging out at an 0-6 record with a 12.46 ERA in a pitcher's park. That $8mil deal is really working out great for Seattle.

JB98
06-12-2007, 07:03 PM
Whoops...

Anyway, Jeff is hanging out at an 0-6 record with a 12.46 ERA in a pitcher's park. That $8mil deal is really working out great for Seattle.

Weaver faces that World Series-bound Cubbie team in a couple days. ERA about to come down. :cool: