Mr. Showtime Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Not a surprise by any means: Rosenthal reported this in his latest Inside Dish: In addition to exploring trades for one of their top three starting pitchers, the A's are also involved in two- and three-team discussions regarding Pirates C Jason Kendall, who is guaranteed $34 million over the next three seasons. A straight trade between the A's and Pirates likely would involve the Pirates receiving LHPs Mark Redman and Arthur Rhodes, who are owed $16.15 million combined over the next two seasons. Kendall also could land with the Dodgers--straight up or via the A's--with the Pirates possibly seeking Dodgers CF Milton Bradley. The expected loss of free-agent CF Steve Finley makes a trade of Bradley unlikely. . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AddisonStSox Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Kenny is going to have to get aggressive, and I have confidence that he will. If he pieces the right deal together, Kendall can still end up a Chicago White Stocking. He may overpay, but it still could get done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilJester99 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I got a feeling the Sox are waiting to hear from RJ about what he wants to do b4 they do anything. If he rejects the Sox I bet they trade for Kendall and ship him to Oak for one of the big 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beast Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Maybe Billy Beane is making his payroll go up...wonder how the owners will react to that one...hmm... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Maybe Billy Beane is making his payroll go up...wonder how the owners will react to that one...hmm... The owners are the ones who have to sign off on any of the deals so he can't do anything without their approval, just like Kenny needs JR's approval to make deals adn every other GM in the game needs the same. Unless of course you consider Georgie Porgie a GM cause quite often he negotiates his own deals with players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 It makes me feel better about the Sox getting a deal done when the other rumors start. KW usual finds a way to get the guys he wants, and he likes to keep it on the down low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 The A's may want to get rid of both Redman and Rhodes, but just because they want to doesn't mean they will, esp for Kendall. Pirate fans don't just want to give Kendall away. They want talent [either in prospects or current players] in return. The two A's won't get it done. Both make too much for Pitt. to take on. The Pirates would have to explain why two bums are getting paid so much when they couldn't afford Kendall. also, the A's would still have Pitt take on some of Kendall's contract. So Pitt. would get two bad contracts and still have to pay salary? I don't buy it. Even Billy Beane. A deal around Garland, who is solid and cheap, Ben Davis and a prospect who'd be ready to play in 2005 like Munoz for Kendall and cash, makes more sense. Pitt. isn't just trying to save money. They're also trying to win games and win over fans by erasing the stigma that they're cheap [even though they'll still be]. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Pirate fans may not want to give Kendall away, but ownership would be more then happy to accept that deal. As far as I'm concerned I think the Pirates would be very interested in that offer. The only thing I'd prefer if I were the Pirates would be not taking Rhodes contract and instead paying some cash in the deal. Redman is a solid starter though so it would be interesting, especially since budget wise it would help the Pirates and thats what they want to do. They want to make sure they can free money to sign their core players and I don't think they consider Kendall a core player at this point, especially since they are still a few years off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Pirate fans may not want to give Kendall away, but ownership would be more then happy to accept that deal. As far as I'm concerned I think the Pirates would be very interested in that offer. The only thing I'd prefer if I were the Pirates would be not taking Rhodes contract and instead paying some cash in the deal. Redman is a solid starter though so it would be interesting, especially since budget wise it would help the Pirates and thats what they want to do. They want to make sure they can free money to sign their core players and I don't think they consider Kendall a core player at this point, especially since they are still a few years off. What I'm talking about is Pitt. mgmt also has to consider the PR aspects of a Kendall deal. With the sell off of a few years ago, following the opening of PNC park, coupled with Kendall being a fan favorite, who would fans more readily accept--Redman or Garland? Who fits better with the team? Who has more upside? I think Pitt. has seen the value in trading their high priced guys [like Giles for Oliver Perez]. But they have to be traded for guys with promise. A Garland deal would be a ton better than Redman. Even if it didn't work out, on the PR side, getting a young SP with promise is better than getting a mid level SP on the down side of his career. A garland deal would also help Pitt. salary wise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 What I'm talking about is Pitt. mgmt also has to consider the PR aspects of a Kendall deal. With the sell off of a few years ago, following the opening of PNC park, coupled with Kendall being a fan favorite, who would fans more readily accept--Redman or Garland? Who fits better with the team? Who has more upside? I think Pitt. has seen the value in trading their high priced guys [like Giles for Oliver Perez]. But they have to be traded for guys with promise. A Garland deal would be a ton better than Redman. Even if it didn't work out, on the PR side, getting a young SP with promise is better than getting a mid level SP on the down side of his career. A garland deal would also help Pitt. salary wise. I don't doubt a Garland for Kendall swap would be something the Pirates would consider, depending on how much cash they had to send to the Sox. I sure hope it would be a lot. Of course this deal couldn't be made today. It would be stupid for the Sox to deal Garland without first figuring getting at least one more pitcher and a very good one at that. Plus with Garland potentially one of the big players going in a RJ deal the SOx would want to hold off on him because RJ >>>> Kendall. First the Sox will address the pitching staff, then they may target Kendall, imo, and I don't know whether Garladn will still be with the Sox at that time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 If I'm the Pirates, I prefer Redman to Garland. Somewhat more established, and the contract's not up for a couple years. Garland's as likely to be gone in 2 years, anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chisox2334 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Kendall wants play out west. Hes not coming here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I don't doubt a Garland for Kendall swap would be something the Pirates would consider, depending on how much cash they had to send to the Sox. I sure hope it would be a lot. Of course this deal couldn't be made today. It would be stupid for the Sox to deal Garland without first figuring getting at least one more pitcher and a very good one at that. Plus with Garland potentially one of the big players going in a RJ deal the SOx would want to hold off on him because RJ >>>> Kendall. First the Sox will address the pitching staff, then they may target Kendall, imo, and I don't know whether Garladn will still be with the Sox at that time. If I were the Sox, I wouldn't wait around for RJ to make up his mind. [though I do think the sox want to have another pitcher in before they trade Garland] I don't think RJ is that much better than Kendall, in the big picture, as far as filling the sox needs [as long as he comes in at like $7 mill a yr, then the difference of $9 mill in salary means Kendall + $9 mill. to help fill other needs = RJ, ]. Kendall's OBP, ability to hit leadoff and all around hitting ability would be a key to the sox everyday lineup. Getting an everyday player with his offensive ability would dramatically alter the Sox. With no other leadoff men with his talent seem available, I wouldn't hold off on a Garland trade if it meant losing out on Kendall. With so many contingencies hinging on what RJ does, I wouldn't sit idly by while a guy of Kendalls talent goes elsewhere. The Sox can't just stick with what they had from last yr. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 If I'm the Pirates, I prefer Redman to Garland. Somewhat more established, and the contract's not up for a couple years. Garland's as likely to be gone in 2 years, anyway. How many teams are in MLB? 30, 31? 30 of 30 or 31 of 31 GM's would take Garland over Redman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 If I were the Sox, I wouldn't wait around for RJ to make up his mind. [though I do think the sox want to have another pitcher in before they trade Garland] I don't think RJ is that much better than Kendall, in the big picture, as far as filling the sox needs [as long as he comes in at like $7 mill a yr, then the difference of $9 mill in salary means Kendall + $9 mill. to help fill other needs = RJ, ]. Kendall's OBP, ability to hit leadoff and all around hitting ability would be a key to the sox everyday lineup. Getting an everyday player with his offensive ability would dramatically alter the Sox. With no other leadoff men with his talent seem available, I wouldn't hold off on a Garland trade if it meant losing out on Kendall. With so many contingencies hinging on what RJ does, I wouldn't sit idly by while a guy of Kendalls talent goes elsewhere. The Sox can't just stick with what they had from last yr. RJ might not make a decision until after the first of the year. By that time, we may have lost out on any or all of the top players available via FA or trade. Gotta get whatcha can, when you can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 How many teams are in MLB? 30, 31? 30 of 30 or 31 of 31 GM's would take Garland over Redman. Maybe. But suppose you have a dim view of Garland's future. He's making $3.4 mil (he's not that cheap, really), and he's arbitration eligible. If he has a breakout year, fabulous, you sign him to a big contract and you're both happy. But if I'm a cost-conscious GM, I'm pretty scared by the thought that Garland has a fluke good year, and becomes too expensive to keep, and too unstable to sign. Redman does give you some cost certainty, and he's been pretty reliable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 RJ might not make a decision until after the first of the year. By that time, we may have lost out on any or all of the top players available via FA or trade. Gotta get whatcha can, when you can. It's also not an either/ or deal. The sox need to revamp their lineup and shore up some pitching holes. They need to do both. I'm not saying the Sox are going too slowly. But if they are waiting around for RJ and putting deals on the back burner because of it, they'll screw themselves. They just aren't in the position to do nothing going into 2005. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Maybe. But suppose you have a dim view of Garland's future. He's making $3.4 mil (he's not that cheap, really), and he's arbitration eligible. If he has a breakout year, fabulous, you sign him to a big contract and you're both happy. But if I'm a cost-conscious GM, I'm pretty scared by the thought that Garland has a fluke good year, and becomes too expensive to keep, and too unstable to sign. Redman does give you some cost certainty, and he's been pretty reliable. Garland at $3.4 mill for 1 yr [arb. eligible in 2006?], steady, durable, 25, learning how to pitch, good stuff, a minimum #4 SP, could be higher. Or Redman, $8 + mill for 2 years, history of past injury, a soft tosser, 30, a #4 SP tops? You might convince others, have at it. But you won't convince me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Beast Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I'd do a Garland and a reliever for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 I'm no big Garland booster but he has a lot of value IMO. If Garland went to Pittsburgh along with a pitching prospect let's say, I'd want Kendall with the Pirates eating salary and one of their bullpen arms. Don't laugh folks but I would also take Bobby Hill even though they won't trade him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Garland at $3.4 mill for 1 yr [arb. eligible in 2006?], steady, durable, 25, learning how to pitch, good stuff, a minimum #4 SP, could be higher. Or Redman, $8 + mill for 2 years, history of past injury, a soft tosser, 30, a #4 SP tops? You might convince others, have at it. But you won't convince me No, I'm actually a big fan of Garland. I'm not trying to argue that Redman is, or will be, a better pitcher. I'm only thinking of the cost factor -- I can understand how an organization that wants to cut costs would rather have 2 years at a reasonable price than 1 year at an only slightly more reasonable price. He brings some stability instead of questions, that's all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 No, I'm actually a big fan of Garland. I'm not trying to argue that Redman is, or will be, a better pitcher. I'm only thinking of the cost factor -- I can understand how an organization that wants to cut costs would rather have 2 years at a reasonable price than 1 year at an only slightly more reasonable price. He brings some stability instead of questions, that's all. A team like Pitt. needs all the players they can get to have "breakout" yrs in order for them to make the playoffs [which I'm supposing they want to]. Garland would be one such SP, but also provides stability and dependability. I get where you're coming from. Pitt. would eat Redman's salary to help offset the cost of Kendall. But the talent factor and possible upside of a GArland or a prospect also has to be measured. Pitt would eat less salary for Redman and Rhodes. Yet they have minimal upside. Pitt has to decide about paying another team more of Kendall's salary in order to get some potential upside. With the Oliver Perez deal and the like, Pitt. would prob. go w/ the Garland + deal over the Redman one. JMHO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Perez, Wells, and Garland are a pretty good base for a rotation. I do not think there is a chance in hell KW gives Garland to the Pirates for kendall. Redman and Rhodes are so over paid it is scary. Pit will not take on these two and pay money for Kendall. Kendall is overpaid but he is still productive. Bynes name gets thrown around here. This is a guy that Oakland would have to throw in as well as a young pitcher to get Kendall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 Perez, Wells, and Garland are a pretty good base for a rotation. I do not think there is a chance in hell KW gives Garland to the Pirates for kendall. Redman and Rhodes are so over paid it is scary. Pit will not take on these two and pay money for Kendall. Kendall is overpaid but he is still productive. Bynes name gets thrown around here. This is a guy that Oakland would have to throw in as well as a young pitcher to get Kendall. How is redman over payed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted November 22, 2004 Share Posted November 22, 2004 How is redman over payed? He'll make over $4 mill a yr in 05 and 06 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.