PDA

View Full Version : Carl Crawford? Rotoworld Trade Proposal


nysox35
11-28-2007, 09:51 AM
Sorry in advance for a Carl Crawford thread, but I just read this proposal on Rotoworld and it intrigued me:
Carl Crawoford
To White Sox for LHP John Danks (http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.asp?sport=MLB&id=1323), RHP Faustino De Los Santos and RHP David Aardsma (http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.asp?sport=MLB&id=3846)

Would you make that deal? I think I would, but the Garland trade complicates things. (This piece was written before the Garland trade - I believe).
We'd have to be sure Floyd or one of the kids (Gio? Broadway? Egbert?) would step up, or be sure we could sign a decent, cheap #4/#5 FA. Giving De Los Santos would hurt, but Crawford would really cure a couple of our key issues.
It almost doesn't seem like a good enough package, does it?

ShoelessJoeS
11-28-2007, 09:55 AM
No way Crawford comes that easily.

D. TODD
11-28-2007, 09:58 AM
That is a pipedream of a deal, but in their fantasy world where the Rays would take that HELL YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WizardsofOzzie
11-28-2007, 10:00 AM
Not a chance in hell the Rays make that trade. That would be one mega steal for us

skottyj242
11-28-2007, 10:01 AM
If that is real I would take it in a heartbeat.

veeter
11-28-2007, 10:02 AM
I would NOT do that deal. De Los Santos, if you'd pardon the expression, is a comer. He'll be in the bigs very soon. I know I'm in the minority here, but Crawford would be irritating us with his defense, after only a couple of weeks. He's a blockhead in the field. Just my opinion.

voodoochile
11-28-2007, 10:04 AM
Yes yes yes... a thousand times yes...

nysox35
11-28-2007, 10:17 AM
Here's the Link:
http://www.rotoworld.com/content/features/column.aspx?sport=MLB&columnid=2&articleid=29505

Risk
11-28-2007, 10:19 AM
I'd do that deal, however, the realist side of me says that there is no way the Rays would do it.

Risk

EMachine10
11-28-2007, 10:21 AM
Yeah, sure, only if Kenny finds a few starters to clamp onto the back of our rotation.

voodoochile
11-28-2007, 10:22 AM
I'd do that deal, however, the realist side of me says that there is no way the Rays would do it.

Risk

Depends on how the Rays evaluate those pitchers. They are looking for good young inexpensive arms or so the rumors go in exchange for Crawford. The Sox have a ton of good young arms in their system.

Gammons Peter
11-28-2007, 10:24 AM
yes please

Jimmy Piersall
11-28-2007, 10:25 AM
Yeah, sure, only if Kenny finds a few starters to clamp onto the back of our rotation.


Speaking of starters,has anyone heard what it
is going to take to get Dan Haren from Oakland ?
This guy has another 3 years to go on his deal
and his contract is nothing by today's market.

Gammons Peter
11-28-2007, 10:37 AM
I would NOT do that deal. De Los Santos, if you'd pardon the expression, is a comer. He'll be in the bigs very soon. I know I'm in the minority here, but Crawford would be irritating us with his defense, after only a couple of weeks. He's a blockhead in the field. Just my opinion.


why are people so high on this kid? his low-A numbers are pretty good but his high-A numbers are:

1-1, 3.65 20 hits in 24.2IP 32K 10BB

wulfy
11-28-2007, 10:44 AM
why are people so high on this kid? his low-A numbers are pretty good but his high-A numbers are:

1-1, 3.65 20 hits in 24.2IP 32K 10BB

In bold - I think that's why.

oeo
11-28-2007, 10:50 AM
No way Crawford comes that easily.

That easily? :?:

We'd be giving up a major league ready LHSP who has loads of potential, and a guy that projects as a staff ace.

I wouldn't do it. That's another hole in the rotation (I really like Danks, too), and DLS will be something special. And I know that's what it will take to land a guy like Crawford...but I don't want a guy like Crawford because of that. You just have to give up too much.

Gammons Peter
11-28-2007, 10:51 AM
Yes, thats nice but keep in mind that he is 21, pitching against a lot of kids in their teens.

oeo
11-28-2007, 10:54 AM
Yes, thats nice but keep in mind that he is 21, pitching against a lot of kids in their teens.

I'll keep in mind that you have no idea what you're talking about. DLS is highly regarded around the league; scouts love him. You know nothing about him...I'll take their word for it.

doublem23
11-28-2007, 11:03 AM
scouts love him. You know nothing about him...I'll take their word for it.

We all know they're never wrong about A-ball pitchers!

Sockinchisox
11-28-2007, 11:09 AM
We all know they're never wrong about A-ball pitchers!

DLS has the stuff to be a legit ace, the high strikeout, low ERA type of ace.
BP has him regarded as a 5 star prospect.

Gammons Peter
11-28-2007, 11:10 AM
I'll keep in mind that you have no idea what you're talking about. DLS is highly regarded around the league; scouts love him. You know nothing about him...I'll take their word for it.

I have seen him pitch, have you?

Chez
11-28-2007, 11:14 AM
Would I make that trade? Not only would I make it, I would drive Danks, Aardsma and DLS to Tampa! No way Tampa can't do better than these three.

asindc
11-28-2007, 11:17 AM
That easily? :?:

We'd be giving up a major league ready LHSP who has loads of potential, and a guy that projects as a staff ace.

I wouldn't do it. That's another hole in the rotation (I really like Danks, too), and DLS will be something special. And I know that's what it will take to land a guy like Crawford...but I don't want a guy like Crawford because of that. You just have to give up too much.

I'd do the deal before the Rays changed their minds. I think Crawford is one of the top 2-3 leadoff guys in the AL. Yes, giving up DLS would be a major hurt, but as you note, that is what it would take to get Crawford. Imagine him in front of Cabrera/Dye/Thome/Konerko/Fields/AJ. I like it. Don't think it will happen, though.

mjmcend
11-28-2007, 11:20 AM
I'd do the deal before the Rays changed their minds. I think Crawford is one of the top 2-3 leadoff guys in the AL. Yes, giving up DLS would be a major hurt, but as you note, that is what it would take to get Crawford. Imagine him in front of Cabrera/Dye/Thome/Konerko/Fields/AJ. I like it. Don't think it will happen, though.

Besides the fact he is not a leadoff hitter, that's perfect.

doublem23
11-28-2007, 11:20 AM
DLS has the stuff to be a legit ace, the high strikeout, low ERA type of ace.
BP has him regarded as a 5 star prospect.

I think you're referring to Baseball America and not Baseball Prospectus, but I digress because I forogot that neither of them are wrong, either.

:worship: http://espn.go.com/i/editorial/2006/0403/photo/g_003_bbtn_250.jpg

I can see why the Sox should hang onto a 21-year-old A-ball pitcher over a guy who had a .355 OBP, 57 extra base hits, and 50 SB as a 25-year-old Major Leaguer. Honestly, my only hesitation with that deal is giving up Danks, but even then I still would probably pull the trigger.

voodoochile
11-28-2007, 11:23 AM
Besides the fact he is not a leadoff hitter, that's perfect.

He'd probably be batting leadoff for the Sox whether he did it in Tampa or not. Either he or Cabrera are going to be leading off if the Sox somehow land Crawford because the other option is Owens and that simply makes no sense at all.

Sockinchisox
11-28-2007, 11:26 AM
I think you're referring to Baseball America and not Baseball Prospectus, but I digress because I forogot that neither of them are wrong, either.

:worship: http://espn.go.com/i/editorial/2006/0403/photo/g_003_bbtn_250.jpg

I can see why the Sox should hang onto a 21-year-old A-ball pitcher over a guy who had a .355 OBP, 57 extra base hits, and 50 SB as a 25-year-old Major Leaguer. Honestly, my only hesitation with that deal is giving up Danks, but even then I still would probably pull the trigger.

No, it's BP they did a White Sox top 11 prospects list 2 weeks or so ago, it might still be in Minor Observations. It was locked and I dunno if someone deleted it or not.

asindc
11-28-2007, 11:31 AM
Besides the fact he is not a leadoff hitter, that's perfect.

I'm not 100% sure, but I thought Crawford was their leadoff hitter this past season. If not, who was?

Gammons Peter
11-28-2007, 11:36 AM
I'm not saying DLS isn't a good one. I am saying that you give him up in a heatbeat to get Carl Crawford. You guys ever watch a low-A ball game? My highschool team was better then some of the A ball games I've seen.

doublem23
11-28-2007, 11:36 AM
No, it's BP they did a White Sox top 11 prospects list 2 weeks or so ago, it might still be in Minor Observations. It was locked and I dunno if someone deleted it or not.

OK, well my mistake... That's why I don't work for BP or BA! I'm wrong too often!

Sockinchisox
11-28-2007, 11:38 AM
OK, well my mistake... That's why I don't work for BP or BA! I'm wrong too often!

Haha, it's cool everyone makes mistakes.

Gammons Peter
11-28-2007, 11:48 AM
I'm not 100% sure, but I thought Crawford was their leadoff hitter this past season. If not, who was?
Carl Crawford 2007 batting
Batting 1st 7 games
Batting 2nd 61 games
Batting 3rd 71 games
Batting 6th 2 games
Batting 8th 1 games
Batting 9th 1 games
He was good enough to hit 3rd 71 times for Tampa (much better offense than the Sox last year)

Sockinchisox
11-28-2007, 11:50 AM
I'm not 100% sure, but I thought Crawford was their leadoff hitter this past season. If not, who was?

Iwamura led off for them quite a bit, then he got hurt and it was kind of a draw straws to see who leads off kinda thing.

colles9
11-28-2007, 11:50 AM
I'm not 100% sure, but I thought Crawford was their leadoff hitter this past season. If not, who was?

Crawford led off the first 7 games of last season. Baldelli lead off a majority of the time in the begining of the season and then Iwamura led off the remainder of the season. Crawford spent a majority of last season batting in the 3 spot.

asindc
11-28-2007, 11:55 AM
Crawford led off the first 7 games of last season. Baldelli lead off a majority of the time in the begining of the season and then Iwamura led off the remainder of the season. Crawford spent a majority of last season batting in the 3 spot.

I just did a Google search and found pretty much the same thing. As a previous poster mentioned, his experience as a leadoff batter aside, I still think he would be by far our best option as leadoff if the Sox acquired him. 50 steals? I don't think there is much of an argument to made against it, quite frankly.

Gammons Peter
11-28-2007, 12:03 PM
google search to look 3 posts above??

sullythered
11-28-2007, 12:26 PM
why are people so high on this kid? his low-A numbers are pretty good but his high-A numbers are:

1-1, 3.65 20 hits in 24.2IP 32K 10BB
Have you seen him throw the ball? Wicked, crazy, Liriano-esque stuff.

KRS1
11-28-2007, 12:52 PM
Have you seen him throw the ball? Wicked, crazy, Liriano-esque stuff.

He said he did in one of his other posts.

I don't get Liriano-esque stuff at all, but I have seen him pitch and was extremely impressed. Mid 90's FB with a ton of two-seam and sinking movement, and a low 80's snap dragon he threw two different ways(maybe he has both a slider and a curve). The only thing I was disappointed with was that I didn't see a change.

asindc
11-28-2007, 12:53 PM
google search to look 3 posts above??

GP, Thank you for the information. Before you posted, I did the search. I was just simply stating that I found similar information.

Tragg
11-28-2007, 12:59 PM
That's a high price indeed: essentially our 2 best pitching prospects, both of whom are grade A. Los Santos is one of the top pitching prospects in all of baseball...probably the top in the low minors.
Crawford is an 820 OPS player. Good, not great. Defense isn't good. We could use him, but veteran for veteran or excess for excess.

voodoochile
11-28-2007, 01:03 PM
That's a high price indeed: essentially our 2 best pitching prospects, both of whom are grade A. Los Santos is one of the top pitching prospects in all of baseball.
Crawford is an 820 OPS player. Good, not great.

That's what prospects are for. Lots of things could/can happen before DLS ever throws a pitch for any major league club. One of the things about trading for veterans you know their bodies can hold up to the demands of playing on this level. I hope the Sox keep DLS and he turns into Roger Clemens, but you never expect that to happen ever because there are too many variables to reliably predict what a 20 YO kid will do 4 years from now.

Tragg
11-28-2007, 01:20 PM
That's what prospects are for. Lots of things could/can happen before DLS ever throws a pitch for any major league club. One of the things about trading for veterans you know their bodies can hold up to the demands of playing on this level. I hope the Sox keep DLS and he turns into Roger Clemens, but you never expect that to happen ever because there are too many variables to reliably predict what a 20 YO kid will do 4 years from now.

True, except that top organizations reserve their best prospects. Los Santos is that. Danks is that. There's no reason that the Sox have to trade the best prospects. Do some bargaining - have some patience - cut a deal for once. Trade the secondary prospects. Unfortunately, the Sox don't have that patience to reserve their top prospects so we have Jerry Owens in CF and won we won 72 games last year. (and don't we constantly here how the Sox could never get a top prospect for player X because no one trades top prospects?).

I'd like to se the Sox trade some pitching prospects, of which we have many, for another team's position prospects of which we have zip. However, no position player has yet to develop from a minor leaguer into a major leaguer under Ozzie and Walker, so that may be pointless.

oeo
11-28-2007, 01:23 PM
I have seen him pitch, have you?

That's irrelevant. I never said I knew what kind of future he had. I said that he is very highly regarded by people around the league. You're the one strutting your stuff.

I'm going to take the professional's word, over some guy that maybe saw him pitch once or twice. I'm sure you were there evaluating his talent, and how it will translate as his career moves forward.

oeo
11-28-2007, 01:28 PM
I'd do the deal before the Rays changed their minds. I think Crawford is one of the top 2-3 leadoff guys in the AL. Yes, giving up DLS would be a major hurt, but as you note, that is what it would take to get Crawford. Imagine him in front of Cabrera/Dye/Thome/Konerko/Fields/AJ. I like it. Don't think it will happen, though.

And imagine our rotation as it gets even younger and less experienced. No thanks.

Domeshot17
11-28-2007, 01:29 PM
I'd like to se the Sox trade some pitching prospects, of which we have many, for another team's position prospects of which we have zip. However, no position player has yet to develop from a minor leaguer into a major leaguer under Ozzie and Walker, so that may be pointless.

I agree we need hitting/positional specs, but I dont blame Ozzie/Walk for lack of development. It is more on our scouting and minor league systems. When guys get to the show, there is an expected learning curve, but for the most part they should be ready to play. You don't come up from triple A to learn the game and be coached, to learn a new pitch or to make major changes to your swing. THAT IS WHAT THE MINORS ARE FOR.

The only exception I can even think of is Owens, but he just isn't that talented to begin with.

FedEx227
11-28-2007, 01:31 PM
I agree we need hitting/positional specs, but I dont blame Ozzie/Walk for lack of development. It is more on our scouting and minor league systems. When guys get to the show, there is an expected learning curve, but for the most part they should be ready to play. You don't come up from triple A to learn the game and be coached, to learn a new pitch or to make major changes to your swing. THAT IS WHAT THE MINORS ARE FOR.

The only exception I can even think of is Owens, but he just isn't that talented to begin with.

We also didn't have Owens from the beginning, either. We acquired him from the Nationals.

But yeah, this minor league development/drafting everything needs to change. We're a pathetic system these days, only a select few clubs are worse than us off the top of my head, Astros. Thankfully because of DLS/Gio we get some points.

voodoochile
11-28-2007, 01:34 PM
And imagine our rotation as it gets even younger and less experienced. No thanks.

Actually, I think KW would make a strong move at a veteran retread starter or try to deal Crede and prospects for a veteran starter, but since they wouldn't want to trade for Crawford unless they were pretty sure they could extend him, it might effect how much money they could spend elsewhere, especially with their desire to extend Cabrera too.

Gammons Peter
11-28-2007, 01:57 PM
That's irrelevant. I never said I knew what kind of future he had. I said that he is very highly regarded by people around the league. You're the one strutting your stuff.

I'm going to take the professional's word, over some guy that maybe saw him pitch once or twice. I'm sure you were there evaluating his talent, and how it will translate as his career moves forward.


No, I am not strutting anything. You were the one saying:

"you have no idea what you're talking about"

and

"You know nothing about him"

Both statements are false

gregory18n
11-28-2007, 02:01 PM
If this is real.... pull the trigger, Kenny!

u won't get a second chance.

russ99
11-28-2007, 02:30 PM
Sorry in advance for a Carl Crawford thread, but I just read this proposal on Rotoworld and it intrigued me:
Carl Crawoford
To White Sox for LHP John Danks (http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.asp?sport=MLB&id=1323), RHP Faustino De Los Santos and RHP David Aardsma (http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_main.asp?sport=MLB&id=3846)

Would you make that deal? I think I would, but the Garland trade complicates things. (This piece was written before the Garland trade - I believe).
We'd have to be sure Floyd or one of the kids (Gio? Broadway? Egbert?) would step up, or be sure we could sign a decent, cheap #4/#5 FA. Giving De Los Santos would hurt, but Crawford would really cure a couple of our key issues.
It almost doesn't seem like a good enough package, does it?

It might be feasible if the Sox threw in another non-Gio pitcher and a lesser non-OF hitter prospect.

What about Floyd, De Los Santos, Aardsma, Russell or Egbert and Carter. Maybe the Rays would go for that?

We'd be mortgaging our future a bit too much, but considering the Sox track record in developing prospects, it might be worth it.

guillen4life13
11-28-2007, 02:36 PM
It might be feasible if the Sox threw in another non-Gio pitcher and a lesser non-OF hitter prospect.

What about Floyd, De Los Santos, Aardsma, Russell or Egbert and Carter. Maybe the Rays would go for that?

We'd be mortgaging our future a bit too much, but considering the Sox track record in developing prospects, it might be worth it.

As in good or bad?

russ99
11-28-2007, 02:46 PM
As in good or bad?

Bad.

I believe Carlos Lee is the last big-name player the Sox developed from their minors (Crede, Magglio, Frank and Buehrle were already here).

Think about it - look at our main players:

AJ - from SF
Paulie - from LA or Cin (forget who)
Richar - from Ari
Cabrera - from Ana
Uribe - from Col
Fields - Sox
Crede - Sox
Dye - from Oak
Owens - from Wsh
Thome - from Phl
Burls - Sox
Vazquez - from Ari
Contreras - from NYY
Danks - from Tex
Floyd - from Phil
MacDougal - from KC
Thornton - from Sea
Linebrink - from Mil
Jenks - from Ana

I guess that means either the Sox are bad at drafting and developing players or Kenny's great at trading our prospects for value. Probably a little of both.

asindc
11-28-2007, 02:57 PM
Bad.

I believe Carlos Lee is the last big-name player the Sox developed from their minors (Crede, Magglio, Frank and Buehrle were already here).

Think about it - look at our main players:

AJ - from SF
Paulie - from LA or Cin (forget who)
Richar - from Ari
Cabrera - from Ana
Uribe - from Col
Fields - Sox
Crede - Sox
Dye - from Oak
Owens - from Wsh
Thome - from Phl
Burls - Sox
Vazquez - from Ari
Contreras - from NYY
Danks - from Tex
Floyd - from Phil
MacDougal - from KC
Thornton - from Sea
Linebrink - from Mil
Jenks - from Ana

I guess that means either the Sox are bad at drafting and developing players or Kenny's great at trading our prospects for value. Probably a little of both.

Not to contradict your main point, because I basically agree, but I would not be surprised if most clubs' rosters have a similar ratio of home grown vs. acquired personnel.

WhiteSox5187
11-28-2007, 02:59 PM
Bad.

I believe Carlos Lee is the last big-name player the Sox developed from their minors (Crede, Magglio, Frank and Buehrle were already here).

Think about it - look at our main players:

AJ - from SF
Paulie - from LA or Cin (forget who)
Richar - from Ari
Cabrera - from Ana
Uribe - from Col
Fields - Sox
Crede - Sox
Dye - from Oak
Owens - from Wsh
Thome - from Phl
Burls - Sox
Vazquez - from Ari
Contreras - from NYY
Danks - from Tex
Floyd - from Phil
MacDougal - from KC
Thornton - from Sea
Linebrink - from Mil
Jenks - from Ana

I guess that means either the Sox are bad at drafting and developing players or Kenny's great at trading our prospects for value. Probably a little of both.
Rowand came up from our system, he could be considered a big name player...I don't think that this is a bad trade at all for either side. The D-Rays get a lot of young and potentially good pitching and we get Crawford which fills a need at left and potentially at leadoff and it gives us more speed in the lineup...that would require Kenny to go out and get another starter though. I don't think we can count on Floyd to be a number four starter...

russ99
11-28-2007, 03:08 PM
Rowand came up from our system, he could be considered a big name player...I don't think that this is a bad trade at all for either side. The D-Rays get a lot of young and potentially good pitching and we get Crawford which fills a need at left and potentially at leadoff and it gives us more speed in the lineup...that would require Kenny to go out and get another starter though. I don't think we can count on Floyd to be a number four starter...

Looks like all bets are off on Crawford if that Delmon Young deal does through...

WhiteSox5187
11-28-2007, 03:31 PM
Looks like all bets are off on Crawford if that Delmon Young deal does through...
Yea...so that leaves the Sox with holes at left, center, leadoff (though Cabrera could fill that hole if need be) and the bullpen. If the Rays deal goes down, you can take the Twins off the market for Coco Crisp (probably), so we could potentially get him and have him fill the hole in CF/LF or leadoff.

Tragg
11-28-2007, 03:32 PM
Looks like all bets are off on Crawford if that Delmon Young deal does through...
I don't know the Twins' prospects, but how does that package that they are giving for young (who has a higher value than Crawford) measure up to Danks and Los Santos (one of the top 3 pitching prospects in the low minors in baseball)

Frater Perdurabo
11-28-2007, 03:59 PM
Not to contradict your main point, because I basically agree, but I would not be surprised if most clubs' rosters have a similar ratio of home grown vs. acquired personnel.

Work it the other way. Build a roster with players drafted or developed by the Sox. It would include these players:

Hitters: Frank (DH), Rowand (LF), Cameron (CF), Maggs (RF), Lee (convert to 1B), Chris Young (OF), Fields (3B/1B/DH), Crede (3B), Durham (2B);

Rotation: Buehrle, Garland (give them credit here, even though the Cubs drafted him), McCarthy, Kip Wells, Josh Fogg;

Bullpen: choose from among Chad Bradford, Gary Majewski, Jon Rauch, Broadway, Haeger, Royce Ring, Logan, Tracey, Josh Rupe, etc.

Catcher (Chris Stewart? Josh Paul?) and SS (Mike Morse?) obviously would be a problem, and the back end of the rotation is a little light, but that's a pretty good bunch of veteran right-handed hitters. All in all it's a mixed record that shows what Daver and others have noticed all along: the Sox organization promotes players based on their ability to hit, not field; and lately they've drafted and developed fewer position players and more pitchers.

goon
11-28-2007, 03:59 PM
I don't know the Twins' prospects, but how does that package that they are giving for young (who has a higher value than Crawford) measure up to Danks and Los Santos (one of the top 3 pitching prospects in the low minors in baseball)

I'm not sure if you are asking that in the form of a question or the if you do know and you're criticizing the deal... but yeah, I was wondering that myself. Despite Young's troubles he seems to have the most offensive potential on that roster and the fact he can play CF is huge. Garza's numbers in the minors are impressive, but it certainly seems like Young has a brighter future.

Maybe what's tipping the scales for the Rays is the fact that they get a quality reliever with Rincon in the deal. That could also be part of the problem with what the Sox are offering, Danks and only prospects rather than proven major league talent.

oeo
11-28-2007, 04:02 PM
I don't know the Twins' prospects, but how does that package that they are giving for young (who has a higher value than Crawford) measure up to Danks and Los Santos (one of the top 3 pitching prospects in the low minors in baseball)

The Twins are giving up one prospect, a mediocre SS, and an aging, declining reliever. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that two prospects (one major league ready like Garza), and a crappy reliever for Crawford is a better deal. But the Sox probably don't want to make that deal.

Gammons Peter
11-28-2007, 04:04 PM
I don't know the Twins' prospects, but how does that package that they are giving for young (who has a higher value than Crawford) measure up to Danks and Los Santos (one of the top 3 pitching prospects in the low minors in baseball)

One of the top 3 pitching prospects in the low minors = not as much as you think

santo=dorf
11-28-2007, 04:08 PM
If I'm trading DLS and Danks, it'll be for Dan Haren. Not some fantasy baseball stud.

Domeshot17
11-28-2007, 04:17 PM
Our inability to scout and draft costs us again

At pick 15 we took Broadway, who looks to be a safe back end of the rotation pitcher.

Pick 23 went Ellsbury, who would solve our CF problems

pick 25 goes Garza, who we could use either in the rotation or to land Crawford.

It just amazes me how weak we draft. Broadway has next to no trade value right now (most rumors involve him as a B spec or not be wanted at all) while the twins 10 spots later pull a big pitching spec again.

MCHSoxFan
11-28-2007, 04:31 PM
No way Crawford comes that easily.

That is exactly what I was thinking!!! :D:

goon
11-28-2007, 04:32 PM
The Twins are giving up one prospect, a mediocre SS, and an aging, declining reliever. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that two prospects (one major league ready like Garza), and a crappy reliever for Crawford is a better deal. But the Sox probably don't want to make that deal.

Juan Rincon is going to be 29 and though he had a bad season in 2007, I don't know if it's safe to point to that specifically as declining. Look at what he's done the previous 4 years, he's a solid pitcher, definitely a bargaining chip.

gregory18n
11-28-2007, 07:00 PM
If the Twins deal goes through, we'll have been hoodwinked again. With Hunter gone, the absolute best option is Crawford! Kenny needs to up the ante NOW & close the deal. The door is closing fast!

oeo
11-28-2007, 07:03 PM
Juan Rincon is going to be 29 and though he had a bad season in 2007, I don't know if it's safe to point to that specifically as declining. Look at what he's done the previous 4 years, he's a solid pitcher, definitely a bargaining chip.

If I remember correctly, ma-gaga thinks Rincon's best days are behind him.

If the Twins deal goes through, we'll have been hoodwinked again. With Hunter gone, the absolute best option is Crawford! Kenny needs to up the ante NOW & close the deal. The door is closing fast!

Uh...no he doesn't. That's stupid business. Why would we trade even more pitching, when what we need is more pitching.

asindc
11-28-2007, 07:22 PM
Uh...no he doesn't. That's stupid business. Why would we trade even more pitching, when what we need is more pitching.

I agree. No need to panic and overpay for a position player with pitching when we need more pitching.

Sockinchisox
11-28-2007, 07:29 PM
The deal is being held up due to "problems" with Rincon's medical reports.

BadBobbyJenks
11-28-2007, 07:38 PM
crawford to the sox not happening
:deadhorse:

gregory18n
11-28-2007, 08:12 PM
Crawford is a singular entity. the pitchers are major "ifs", of which there are a million. I know pitching is key, but we seem to unload ours pretty frequently, without the effort to extend. we need to simply buy more. Crawford fills multiple holes for us, long term. wake up!

EMel9281
11-28-2007, 08:22 PM
If Carl Craw-ford comes to the Sox, I'll eat my shoe. It seems that a lot of people here want Crawford for some reason, don't you remember he got hurt at the end of the year? He's not a lead-off hitter as denoted previously in this post (or another). We have our #2 hitter now in Cabrera. We have 3-4-5 already, so I don't think it's going to happen. I think we will be getting a LF as we don't have one now as well as Fields will not play LF. Crawford is not the man, however.

I think Carl Everett is available, though, if you'd like to have a Carl around...

KyWhiSoxFan
11-28-2007, 08:28 PM
I don't do that deal for one reason: The Sox can't afford to give up any more pitching without getting pitching in return. They already have one huge hole to fill with the departure of Garland, with a bunch of ifs--Floyd, Danks, Broadway, Gio, Egbert, etc.--trying to fill the void. Of all those guys, Danks is the closest to being ready to be dependable, and he even has a chance to be 2nd or 3rd in the rotation. He has a lot of uipside and he's cheap. Why trade him?

Some teams are trying to get Johan Santana, while some people around here are advocating trading for Carl Crawford and saying to hell with the pitching. And to hell the pitching would go.

gregory18n
11-28-2007, 08:47 PM
R U Kidding, Kenny throws away our starters! Obviously money will have to be spent to get more. Trading for them hasn't worked. Trade for SPEED = CRAWFORD!!!

KyWhiSoxFan
11-28-2007, 08:57 PM
R U Kidding, Kenny throws away our starters! Obviously money will have to be spent to get more. Trading for them hasn't worked. Trade for SPEED = CRAWFORD!!!

There's no money available for pitching if all you trade are cheap, young players for expensive position players. There's not another $10-million laying around to be spent on pitching.

oeo
11-28-2007, 09:02 PM
Crawford is a singular entity. the pitchers are major "ifs", of which there are a million. I know pitching is key, but we seem to unload ours pretty frequently, without the effort to extend. we need to simply buy more. Crawford fills multiple holes for us, long term. wake up!

Oh yeah, taking another starter out of the rotation and filling that slot with an even less proven guy than Danks will do wonders for the team next year. :rolleyes:

So he may fill a void in LF and possibly leadoff, but then we're stuck with another hole in the rotation.

As mentioned by santo=dorf earlier...if you're going to trade your top pitching prospects, trade them for another pitcher.

Oldschoolsoxguy
11-28-2007, 09:06 PM
If I'm trading DLS and Danks, it'll be for Dan Haren. Not some fantasy baseball stud.

Zactly.This is the guy to get.Front of the rotation kind of guy
and his contract fits the books.Having him on board makes
most folks feel much better about the state of the starters.

gregory18n
11-28-2007, 09:30 PM
CLUELESS! Kenny doesn't do that! He trades proven starters for maybes.

...
11-28-2007, 10:06 PM
CLUELESS! Kenny doesn't do that! He trades proven starters for maybes.

Have you ever considered not posting anymore? Just a thought...

gregory18n
11-28-2007, 10:08 PM
try using your own head.

voodoochile
11-28-2007, 10:11 PM
try using your own head.

You been drinking Greg? You sure are posting like it...

btrain929
11-28-2007, 10:20 PM
try using your own head.

You're the one......with........the shell on it........

KyWhiSoxFan
11-28-2007, 10:22 PM
You been drinking Greg? You sure are posting like it...

It must be the Carl Crawford Kool-Aid.

DickAllen72
11-28-2007, 10:24 PM
ESPN reporting the Garza/Young trade has been completed.

voodoochile
11-28-2007, 10:24 PM
You're the one......with........the shell on it........

You know some people might see a mod in the middle of a thread trying to defuse things and think, "I'm gonna stay out this until the smoke clears." Then there's the posters who decide to stir things up even more than they already are...:?:

BadBobbyJenks
11-28-2007, 10:44 PM
You know some people might see a mod in the middle of a thread trying to defuse things and think, "I'm gonna stay out this until the smoke clears." Then there's the posters who decide to stir things up even more than they already are...:?:


asking someone if they were drinking wile posting is diffusing?

...
11-28-2007, 10:46 PM
asking someone if they were drinking wile posting is diffusing?

I'm outta here....................

voodoochile
11-28-2007, 10:51 PM
asking someone if they were drinking wile posting is diffusing?

Call it sending a message, taking a pulse, dropping a hint, making a suggestion that perhaps the tone of some of the messages recently posted might not be conducive to keeping an active account at WSI.

He got the hint because he stopped posting and logged off.

So I guess it worked.

Got any other enlightening questions you want to ask feel free to drop me a PM...

BadBobbyJenks
11-28-2007, 10:58 PM
Call it sending a message, taking a pulse, dropping a hint, making a suggestion that perhaps the tone of some of the messages recently posted might not be conducive to keeping an active account at WSI.

He got the hint because he stopped posting and logged off.

So I guess it worked.

Got any other enlightening questions you want to ask feel free to drop me a PM...


call me enlightened

BadBobbyJenks
11-28-2007, 11:00 PM
ESPN reporting the Garza/Young trade has been completed.


anyways mauer morneu delmon and the sure fire prospects they will get in return for santana, I am extremely worried about the twins again.


Time to make a move KW.

Domeshot17
11-28-2007, 11:04 PM
call me enlightened

http://gc.advancedmn.com/images/content/forums/pwnd1.jpg

HAHA sorry, just like the picture actually.


With the trade the reason I dont like it mostly is now its 1 less team who coulda used Uribe

BadBobbyJenks
11-28-2007, 11:06 PM
http://gc.advancedmn.com/images/content/forums/pwnd1.jpg

HAHA sorry, just like the picture actually.


:rolleyes: sure was

WhiteSox5187
11-29-2007, 08:44 AM
ESPN reporting the Garza/Young trade has been completed.
Aaaand with that we can all stop hopping for Carl Crawford.

asindc
11-29-2007, 08:54 AM
http://gc.advancedmn.com/images/content/forums/pwnd1.jpg

HAHA sorry, just like the picture actually.


With the trade the reason I dont like it mostly is now its 1 less team who coulda used Uribe

Anyone else notice the guy is wearing teal?

Tragg
11-29-2007, 08:59 AM
The Twins are giving up one prospect, a mediocre SS, and an aging, declining reliever. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that two prospects (one major league ready like Garza), and a crappy reliever for Crawford is a better deal. But the Sox probably don't want to make that deal.
It looked pretty lean. I'm surprised we couldn't match that Twins deal.

spawn
11-29-2007, 09:00 AM
Anyone else notice the guy is wearing teal?
The only thing I notice is that guy looks like he may be missing a key piece of equipment when he hits the ground...

spiffie
11-29-2007, 09:42 AM
If I'm trading DLS and Danks, it'll be for Dan Haren. Not some fantasy baseball stud.
Bingo. I'd gladly send out DLS and Danks, hell, I'd probably even be happy if the Sox were to send DLS and Gio for Haren.

palehozenychicty
11-29-2007, 09:58 AM
He said he did in one of his other posts.

I don't get Liriano-esque stuff at all, but I have seen him pitch and was extremely impressed. Mid 90's FB with a ton of two-seam and sinking movement, and a low 80's snap dragon he threw two different ways(maybe he has both a slider and a curve). The only thing I was disappointed with was that I didn't see a change.

He's in his early twenties, and has plenty of time to develop one. I'd keep DLS until he can't be kept no more.

btrain929
11-29-2007, 10:02 AM
You know some people might see a mod in the middle of a thread trying to defuse things and think, "I'm gonna stay out this until the smoke clears." Then there's the posters who decide to stir things up even more than they already are...:?:

Actually, that was a quote from the movie Tommy Boy. It was an attempt at a comic relief to ease the situation. Calm down, tiger.

Gammons Peter
11-29-2007, 12:45 PM
He's in his early twenties, and has plenty of time to develop one. I'd keep DLS until he can't be kept no more.


DLS just came up in the Keith Law ESPN chat:

Carlos Jose Lugo: Hi Keith, who would you take first in a draft from Angel Villalona, Carlos Triunfel, Fautino De los Santos or Francisco Peņa (Tony's son)? How you rank them?

http://assets.espn.go.com/i/sn2.gif Keith Law: (1:41 PM ET ) Triunfel first, then Villalona.

FarWestChicago
11-29-2007, 12:57 PM
DLS just came up in the Keith Law ESPN chat:

Carlos Jose Lugo: Hi Keith, who would you take first in a draft from Angel Villalona, Carlos Triunfel, Fautino De los Santos or Francisco Peņa (Tony's son)? How you rank them?

http://assets.espn.go.com/i/sn2.gif Keith Law: (1:41 PM ET ) Triunfel first, then Villalona.I'm a bit confused by this. I thought you didn't think much of De los Santos. Doesn't having a goofball like Keith Law not like him make him look good rather than bad? I must be missing something here. :unsure:

Gammons Peter
11-29-2007, 01:05 PM
I'm a bit confused by this. I thought you didn't think much of De los Santos. Doesn't having a goofball like Keith Law not like him make him look good rather than bad? I must be missing something here. :unsure:

Never said I didn't think much of De los Santos.
I said that you don't think twice about giving up an A-baller for an allstar

I hope he makes it, but he is a "prospect"

BadBobbyJenks
11-29-2007, 03:01 PM
I'm a bit confused by this. I thought you didn't think much of De los Santos. Doesn't having a goofball like Keith Law not like him make him look good rather than bad? I must be missing something here. :unsure:



What exactly makes Keith Law a goofball?

guillen4life13
11-29-2007, 03:03 PM
What exactly makes Keith Law a goofball?

The goofy stuff he writes

Gammons Peter
11-29-2007, 03:09 PM
The goofy stuff he writes

One word


sabernomics

BadBobbyJenks
11-29-2007, 03:26 PM
The goofy stuff he writes

One word


sabernomics


Oh right he works for espn, he must be dismissed!