DBAHO Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 From da Trib, The scenario is simply too logical to ignore. New Dodgers owner Frank McCourt is thirsting to make a splashy move, so he signs Greg Maddux to a two-year deal worth, say, $16 million. Then McCourt tries to improve baseball's weakest lineup by trading lefty Odalis Perez and a top prospect to the White Sox for either Frank Thomas or Paul Konerko. You can put it on the board, right? Not so fast. For one, Sox general manager Ken Williams spent much of Thursday refuting broadcast reports that talks with the Dodgers had heated up. Williams said no one from the Sox organization had spoken to any Dodgers officials this week. So the Dodgers haven't even laid the groundwork for a corresponding deal that would add credence and logic to a Maddux signing. Said Williams: "We have never had what I would term serious discussions with the Dodgers for any of our players." True, the Dodgers tried to send beleaguered right-hander Jeff Weaver to the Sox in December for Thomas. (Williams shot that down immediately.) And, yes, the teams discussed a deal at the winter meetings that would have sent Magglio Ordonez to Los Angeles. But the deal was not close to happening because of Ordonez's $14 million salary and Williams' demand for Perez, ace setup man Guillermo Mota and at least two top-notch prospects. If the Dodgers do approach Williams, they might not like what they hear. Williams is in the driver's seat, perfectly content to start the season with Thomas and Konerko. So Williams could demand Perez and two prospects. Or Perez and Mota. There's also the issue of finances. Konerko is due $16.75 million over the next two years, a hefty sum for a player coming off career lows in average (.234), homers (18) and RBIs (65). Thomas is due $17.5 million over the next two seasons—$6 million in 2004, $8 million in 2005 and a $3.5 million buyout. Thomas also has a no-trade clause, but he might waive it for the sake of the $2 million bonus he would receive if he's traded. Though the Dodgers' interest in Maddux is tough to gauge, the Cardinals appear to be gearing up for a serious run at the four-time Cy Young winner. According to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, the team has asked several of its highest-paid players to defer money from their 2004 salaries. Center fielder Jim Edmonds and closer Jason Isringhausen already have agreed to do so, and right-hander Matt Morris might join them. Maddux's agent, Scott Boras, would love to pit the Cardinals against the Cubs in a battle for Maddux's services. But the Cubs will go only so far. Their initial offer was believed to be worth about $12 million. It is doubtful they would increase it beyond $14 million to $15 million, given that they have a promising alternative for their rotation in Juan Cruz. Whatever the case, don't be surprised if the negotiations drag on until spring training. The Cubs have no plans to put a deadline on their offer, and Boras will work deliberately as he continues to solicit offers from the Dodgers, Cardinals and perhaps the Orioles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slick03 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 interesting article....im glad to see kenny standing his ground a little bit on this one....maddux in st. louis, that would be great :fthecubs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawkiconk Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 i don't think any team in the nl would want frank as a full time 1st baseman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnB Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 The sox need another quality starter this year, I would take any deal right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoosierSox Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 You can say all you want about KW but he is doing the right thing here. You cannot just trade somebody without getting something of equal or greater value in return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 The sox need another quality starter this year, I would take any deal right now. Why doesn't Reisndorf open the wallet and the Sox sign Maddux? Why give up our offense when we can sign a free agent and get the best of both worlds? Makes too much sense I guess... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 Why doesn't Reisndorf open the wallet and the Sox sign Maddux? Why give up our offense when we can sign a free agent and get the best of both worlds? Makes too much sense I guess... No way I'd even want Maddux. He got lit up a ton last year and I don't think he'll do that well this year. KW was asked if the Sox were interested at Soxfest and he gave the best answer, NO. Call me crazy, but I have no interest in Maddux and I bet I'm not the only one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 I don't really care for Maddux either. He's basically a 6 inning pitcher at this point of his career. No way is he worth what that f*g Boras is asking. Let the Cards or whoever overpay for his ass... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 No way I'd even want Maddux. He got lit up a ton last year and I don't think he'll do that well this year. KW was asked if the Sox were interested at Soxfest and he gave the best answer, NO. Call me crazy, but I have no interest in Maddux and I bet I'm not the only one. Look at Maddux's stats from his 4th start of the year forward. They were very Maddux like. He had 3 HORRIBLE starts to begin the year, and those skewed his ERA stats all year long. Greg Maddux is still a damn good pitcher. I'd love to have him in that #3 slot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 Look at Maddux's stats from his 4th start of the year forward. They were very Maddux like. He had 3 HORRIBLE starts to begin the year, and those skewed his ERA stats all year long. Greg Maddux is still a damn good pitcher. I'd love to have him in that #3 slot. And will take that one step further. What Greg Maddux could teach to the Jon Rauch, Danny Wright, Neal Cotts of this staff could be huge. Don't forget many pitchers need a mentor to go from point B to point C. Think of Buehrle giving Boomer credit, think of Shilling giving credit to Randy Johnson, etc... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 And will take that one step further. What Greg Maddux could teach to the Jon Rauch, Danny Wright, Neal Cotts of this staff could be huge. Don't forget many pitchers need a mentor to go from point B to point C. Think of Buehrle giving Boomer credit, think of Shilling giving credit to Randy Johnson, etc... To agree with your point further. Curt Schilling did not turn it on until Roger Clemens ripped him. Schilling was 28 at the time. Imagine someone telling him this when he was 24. Think what Jon Garland could be if he had the right mentoring and I am not talking about Don Cooper, I am talking about somebody leading by example. Maybe a Loiaza can do this...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elrockinMT Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 Greg Maddux as a teacher and mentor to the youngsters? YES! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 But is Maddux worth what he's asking? And please don't give me that mentor crap. Didn't the Bulls try that brining in Charles Oakly to teach Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler? If any of our young pitchers become anything it will be because they were good enough... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 But is Maddux worth what he's asking? And please don't give me that mentor crap. Didn't the Bulls try that brining in Charles Oakly to teach Eddy Curry and Tyson Chandler? If any of our young pitchers become anything it will be because they were good enough... Are you really telling me that you would equate Greg Maddux's knowledge of baseball to Charles Oakley's knowledge of basketball? Maddux is a legendary student of the game, and one of the best pitchers of my generation. What is Oakley? And to top it off, baseball, espesially pitching, is a much more cerebral game than basketball. No comparision between the two. None. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Bartman's my idol Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 I WOULD TAKE MADDUX AS WELL, WHO ELSE DO WE HAVE STARTING DANNY WRIGHT? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 Are you really telling me that you would equate Greg Maddux's knowledge of baseball to Charles Oakley's knowledge of basketball? Maddux is a legendary student of the game, and one of the best pitchers of my generateion. What is Oakley? And to top it off, baseball, espesially pitching, is a much more cerebral game than basketball. No comparision between the two. None. It's the same thing when u think about it. I'm not sayin Oakley knows as much about basketball as Maddux does about baseball. But the general idea is the same. Bring in a vet to help the young kids. Guys like Garland, Cotts, Rauch or whoever r not gonna become better pitchers because we brought Maddux or any other vet in. And once again Maddux is not worth what he's askin... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Gleason Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 I would love to have Maddux. But it isn't going to happen. I just think he is still a solid enough pitcher, and he is better than what we have in the bottom of our rotation. Plus, if he did throw a great season this year, tell me you wouldn't love watching a certain other Chicago team just squirm!!! But I think he would be a valuable addition all around. But, as said, it isn't going to happen. Not even worth thinking about more than we already have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 I would love to have Maddux. But 2 years 14 million or whatever he's askin...It ain't happenin... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 It's the same thing when u think about it. I'm not sayin Oakley knows as much about basketball as Maddux does about baseball. But the general idea is the same. Bring in a vet to help the young kids. Guys like Garland, Cotts, Rauch or whoever r not gonna become better pitchers because we brought Maddux or any other vet in. And once again Maddux is not worth what he's askin... To further the question... What if Maddux comes in goes about 30-20 over his two years here with an era of 4ish. But in his time here helps say Neal Cotts realize his potential and teaches him the art of spotting that change up. Is he worth $7 million a year then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 To further the question... What if Maddux comes in goes about 30-20 over his two years here with an era of 4ish. But in his time here helps say Neal Cotts realize his potential and teaches him the art of spotting that change up. Is he worth $7 million a year then? Unless he gets us to the playoffs and helps Cotts and Honel, then I really wouldn't want him here. We'd never sign a Bor-ass client anyhow. I am surprised we even have Crede. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 To further the question... What if Maddux comes in goes about 30-20 over his two years here with an era of 4ish. But in his time here helps say Neal Cotts realize his potential and teaches him the art of spotting that change up. Is he worth $7 million a year then? LOL...Well if that happened then hell yeah it would be worth it. But do u really think Maddux is gonna be able to get Cotts to throw strikes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted February 6, 2004 Share Posted February 6, 2004 LOL...Well if that happened then hell yeah it would be worth it. But do u really think Maddux is gonna be able to get Cotts to throw strikes? Maddux has had a profound affect on a lot of pitchers... A lot of pitchers had career years when they pitched with him. That is one of the points that Borass is trying to sell as a positive for having Maddux signed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandoFan Posted February 7, 2004 Share Posted February 7, 2004 People who think Maddux isn't worth 6-7 Mill a year are on crack. His name in Chicago and ability to teach Cotts/Rauch/Wright/Burhle/Judy about the fine art of change-up and deception alone make him worth an extra mill or two. Keeping him away from the Cubs (if they make the World Series Sox are dead in this town) is worth another Mill or two. He's never been about velocity and is in excellent physical shape. Even at 38, I don't think he is done. Not in prime perhaps, but still good enough that he might just make an All-Star game. He is one year removed from a 2.50 ERA season, and outside of a few rough starts early, he was a 3.50 ERA guy in 2003, sometthing which Ponson can only dream of and Super Bartolo has only done once. Sox need to win and Maddux will be a solid #2. He was sharp in his start against the red-hot Cubs, and only stupid Bobby Fick slipping while fielding a routine bunt led to the second ER. 1 deserved ER in 6+ innings on the road is not that bad. But Sox are stuck with Konerko, Koch and are overpaying Valentin (thanks Kenny, next time his suppurters might wanna STFU), so we simply have no room for GM. None. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted February 7, 2004 Share Posted February 7, 2004 It's the same thing when u think about it. I'm not sayin Oakley knows as much about basketball as Maddux does about baseball. But the general idea is the same. Bring in a vet to help the young kids. Guys like Garland, Cotts, Rauch or whoever r not gonna become better pitchers because we brought Maddux or any other vet in. And once again Maddux is not worth what he's askin... Ya. Buehrle says the same thing about David Wells' time with the Sox all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upnorthsox Posted February 7, 2004 Share Posted February 7, 2004 Ok, here's my trade scenerio: Trade Kong for Perez straight up, that saves you $4 mil. Sign Maddux for 2 yr/$17 mil($8 mil in '04/$9 mil in '05) with $2 mil defered in '04. That puts ya $2 mil over from where we are now. Trade Schoney for a prospect, that save ya almost $2 mil. Viola! Our budget then is where it's at now but we have a rotation of Buehrle, Loaiza, Maddux, Perez, and Garland. Our BP still looks strong if Koch comes back and our GIDP's go down in the lineup. Plus, if things go terribly wrong you still have Maggs to trade at the deadline to save money and get prospects. Hell, I could even put together a package to trade for Carlos Pena to replace Kong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.