DBAHO Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 I'm thinking if we want to acquire Vazquez from Arizona still, if a Big Unit trade goes down, Jon Garland and Brian Anderson will probably be the starting point in negotiations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 I'm thinking if we want to acquire Vazquez from Arizona still, if a Big Unit trade goes down, Jon Garland and Brian Anderson will probably be the starting point in negotiations. Probably. If AZ goes the money route for RJ, getting lesser prospects and more cash from NY, they'd have to pitch in a lot of cash spinning Vazquez off to a 3rd team. I read somewhere that AZ didn't really like Navarro and Duncan. AZ sounds like they have idiots in charge of talent there. Their track record in trades certainly indicates that. Maybe the Sox could get away with trading less talent than Anderson, esp as he's so close to the majors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChWRoCk2 Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 we wont trade our lineup is set except for second base Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 we wont trade our lineup is set except for second base I'd wager that at least one member of starting lineup, rotation or main bullpen anchors get traded before opening day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 I'd wager that at least one member of starting lineup, rotation or main bullpen anchors get traded before opening day. My prediction, in order of likelihood of being traded 1] Everett 2] Adkins 3] garland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 If you're AZ which option do you pick? A: AZ <- Vaz, Halsey, Gomez, Cabrera + 12M, NY <- RJ B: AZ <- Vaz, Duncan, Navarro + 5M, NY <- RJ I'm going with A. For a franchise that is operating in the red to such a degree that Selig is concerned about it becoming MLB owned & operated the 7M has more value right now. Neither Duncan nor Navarro are going to make a difference in ticket sales. That would drop Vaz price down to 23M/3 or just under 8M/yr. AZ should stick with him. He's had solid success in the NL & if he's willing to play for them they should make him their #1 guy. If he's not willing to pay then if they throw in the 7M that would still drop his price down to 28M/3 or a little over 9M/yr. Again in the NL I think he's worth that much. They should be able to get a pitcher of Garland's caliber & a middle relief guy & possibly a reasonable bat for that value. As for Garland, you need to take back your subpar comments. Even if you don't want to accept the losses argument as the best value of a pitcher then just look at the Sags. 2004 NPERA's 25-3.97 (Wakefield), 26-4.07 (Robertson), 27-4.08 (Colon), 28-4.08 (Maroth), 29-4.10 (Garland), 30-4.13 (Contreras) That beat's out Silva, Lohse, & Lee. 2003 NPERA's 25-3.83 (Garcia), 27-3.92 (Suppan), 29-3.96 (Zambrano), 30-3.98 (Garland), 31-4.00 (Radke) That beat's out Rogers, & Davis. 2002 NPERA's 28-3.80 (Appier), 29-3.82 (Baez), 30-3.82 (Ponson), 31-3.91 (Kennedy), 32-4.01 (Garland), 33-4.07 (Lohse) The bottom line is that Garland has improved in the rankings 3 yrs in a row. He just lacks consistency from being a top 20 AL pitcher. He's coming off his first winning season & I expect greater improvement from him. Is it far fetched to believe that Garland can crack the top 20? No. The D of the team has improved & with a stronger staff 1-5 I he should be more loose. Plus Ozzie is going to be toughening him up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 My prediction, in order of likelihood of being traded 1] Everett 2] Adkins 3] garland Can you tell me why you think Everett is most likely to be traded? I mean, I would love to get that $4 million monkey off our back. With Frank predicted to start the season injured, I just don't see it happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raff Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 if we could trade everett, fine by me. we have gload. i think though that he will have a solid year, and that his success may be very closely assosiated with the sox's success. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 My prediction, in order of likelihood of being traded 1] Everett 2] Adkins 3] garland I'd have to say... 1.Garland 2.Harris 3.Politte 4.Crede 5.Everett ...if you take into account both who the Sox want to get rid of, and who would have some value on the open market... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 I'd have to say... 1.Garland 2.Harris 3.Politte 4.Crede 5.Everett ...if you take into account both who the Sox want to get rid of, and who would have some value on the open market... I'd have to agree with that. And of course with KW, prospects are ALWAYS included as a bonus Garland still remains at the top of the list simply because more teams want him than any of the rest. Even with the 12M, Vaz is still coming at a price of 23M/3 yr. If AZ thinks that Garland can do a decent job at a price considerably less than that, they'll work the trade because I think the CWS will be willing to spend that on acquiring Vaz. I think Koney is safe, but AZ will expect Garland, another MLB player, & ml'ers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 Can you tell me why you think Everett is most likely to be traded? I mean, I would love to get that $4 million monkey off our back. With Frank predicted to start the season injured, I just don't see it happening. PK will likely DH and Gload play 1B like the end of the yr. Everett has a lot of value even at his $4 mill. It's just the Sox can't afford to that out to a PT player. A corner OFer with pop from both sides of the plate is valuable. AZ wants Shawn Green for RF at $16 mill?! The Cubs want Hollandsworth and DuBois to play LF?! Everett could fit on plenty of teams. The sox could get AAA guys who could step in in case of injury for minor league depth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 I'd have to say... 1.Garland 2.Harris 3.Politte 4.Crede 5.Everett ...if you take into account both who the Sox want to get rid of, and who would have some value on the open market... Everett has plenty of value. I wouldn't have said that before big money contracts were being handed out like crazy. Politte will stay. A young guy will leave, esp as the Sox have guys who can take Adkins' place in long relief [Diaz, Munoz, Grilli] Adkins was lucky to have such a low ERA most of the yr with guys hitting over .300 off him. I can only see Garland going if the sox traded for a #1 or #2, not likely. Harris I agree. But I don't think the Sox could get fair value for him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 I'm hoping Everett goes on a tear like he did in April of 2003 before Frank comes back so we can get more in return. Right now he doesn't have much trade value, but if he plays like he did in 2003, I'm sure a lot of teams would be interested in him with a price tag less than $4 million (along with a team option for 2006.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 I'm hoping Everett goes on a tear like he did in April of 2003 before Frank comes back so we can get more in return. Right now he doesn't have much trade value, but if he plays like he did in 2003, I'm sure a lot of teams would be interested in him with a price tag less than $4 million (along with a team option for 2006.) There is no option for 2006. There was a player option for 2005 and that is it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 There is no option for 2006. There was a player option for 2005 and that is it. According to dugout dollars, it's a team option for $5 million or a $500,000 buyout. http://dugoutdollars.blogspot.com/2003_08_...rs_archive.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 According to dugout dollars, it's a team option for $5 million or a $500,000 buyout. http://dugoutdollars.blogspot.com/2003_08_...rs_archive.html This is what i see every where. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball...4p-129283c.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1686888 Everett's complex contract will pay him either $3 million for one year, $7.5 million for two seasons or $12 million for three years. He receives a $3 million salary in 2004 and a $4 million player option for 2005. If he exercises it, Montreal would get a $5 million team option for 2006 with a $500,000 buyout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 This is what i see every where. http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball...4p-129283c.html Yeah read the article in your link; If he exercises it, Montreal would get a $5 million team option for 2006 with a $500,000 buyout. I assume since he exercised it for us, we have the team option on him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 Yeah read the article in your link; I assume since he exercised it for us, we have the team option on him. I read it must have just missed it. Sorry for the stupidity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shoe22 Posted December 29, 2004 Share Posted December 29, 2004 Just wondering if anyone has bothered to look up Timo's numbers with ROB, RISP, etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted December 30, 2004 Share Posted December 30, 2004 Just wondering if anyone has bothered to look up Timo's numbers with ROB, RISP, etc? Trying to justify the $? None On 171AB, 205A, 253O, 281S Runners On 122AB, 303A, 331O, 418S Scoring Position 68AB, 397A, 419O, 500S 30 27 4 None On/Out, 1/2out 64AB, 203A, 292O, 266S Men On, 2 out 54AB, 296A, 333O, 352S Scoring Posn, 2 out 34AB, 412A, 444O, 500S Close and Late 47AB, 277A, 320O, 362S Ok. You've made your point. If there are men on when Timo hits he's a star. But if nobody's on he sucks. I can say sucks right? As a bench/pinch player that's a good value. Especially for a LH hitter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted December 30, 2004 Share Posted December 30, 2004 The latest on RJ as reported by the NY Post: RJ has given AZD a deadline of 12/31/04 to deal him. If he is not dealt at that time he's staying with the AZD. It is now believed that the AZD are going to accept the higher prospect deal. AZD <- Vaz, Navarro(1), (Duncan(5) or 2 of Cabrera, Gomez or Halsey) + 7-10M NYY <- RJ Navarro is key to the deal because AZD still wants Green from LAD & they want Navarro. So it's expected that AZD will choose Navarro & drop the cash from 15M to about 10M. That's a high price to pay but they really want Green. That would drop Vaz price to betw 25-28M/3 yr & possibly knock the CWS out of consideration. It can be assumed that AZD will trade Vaz. They can take on both Green's & Vaz's contracts for 2005. Essentially AZD has about 4 days to deal with other teams & the LAD to get Green & as much as they can for Vaz, Navarro, & the rest. If the CWS is involved then it would go down like this: CWS <- Vaz + 7M, + LAD talent LAD <- Koney, Navarro, & new NYY prospects & AZD talent AZD <- Garland, Green I don't see any LAD talent the CWS would want so it would most likely be cash + prospects. Of course it's all speculation but there's no question the LAD's want Koney to replace Green, & AZD want to add Garland to their rotation. That keeps the CWS very much alive in the Vaz trade talk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punch and Judy Garland Posted December 30, 2004 Share Posted December 30, 2004 The sticky point is that Vaz has that right to demand a trade after the 05 season if he is traded. After reading the Gammons article this week on his personal life, I no longer support bringing him here unless he assures us he won't jump ship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted December 30, 2004 Share Posted December 30, 2004 The sticky point is that Vaz has that right to demand a trade after the 05 season if he is traded. After reading the Gammons article this week on his personal life, I no longer support bringing him here unless he assures us he won't jump ship. A contract that allows for a demand to be traded? How can that possibly work with respect to the MLBPA & the league office? If he demands to be traded & the CWS choose not to trade him then he has two options: play & be paid or refuse to play & have the contract voided under league terms at the team's discretion. While the player refuses to play he doesn't get paid. In the case the contract is voided the league would likely treat it as an arbitration scenario where the team that signs him to a new contract would have to compensate the CWS with picks or the league itself would compensate the CWS with picks. That's assuming of course the MLBPA allows the contract to be voided in the first place because the likelihood is that a new contract would reduce the player's earnings. I just don't see how a demand to be traded can be honored. It's definitely in the CWS' best interest to keep him happy & if he prefers to go elsewhere then there's no point in KW getting involved, but at some point he's going to have to grow up & face the reality that it's pretty clear his NYY days are over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted December 30, 2004 Share Posted December 30, 2004 A contract that allows for a demand to be traded? How can that possibly work with respect to the MLBPA & the league office? If he demands to be traded & the CWS choose not to trade him then he has two options: play & be paid or refuse to play & have the contract voided under league terms at the team's discretion. While the player refuses to play he doesn't get paid. In the case the contract is voided the league would likely treat it as an arbitration scenario where the team that signs him to a new contract would have to compensate the CWS with picks or the league itself would compensate the CWS with picks. That's assuming of course the MLBPA allows the contract to be voided in the first place because the likelihood is that a new contract would reduce the player's earnings. I just don't see how a demand to be traded can be honored. It's definitely in the CWS' best interest to keep him happy & if he prefers to go elsewhere then there's no point in KW getting involved, but at some point he's going to have to grow up & face the reality that it's pretty clear his NYY days are over. Incorrect. By being traded after signing a multiyear deal, he has a right to demand a trade afetr one year, per the CBA. 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.