Jump to content

A's after Kendall


Mr. Showtime

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I have to agree with qwerty on this one.

 

If I'm Littlefield, Garland plus Honel or Munoz looks like a fairly attractive offer to me...if I don't have to pay for any of Kendall's salary. If I had to pay a third to a half of his salary, I'd probably look to also get someone like Cotts or Adkins out of the deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Careful there. the White Stockings is former name used by the franchise that is now known as The Cubs (aka The Pinheads)!!!!!!!! :fthecubs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

I must have skipped over this. Say Garland is traded and has a good year in Pitt. If he's a FA after the yr [i don't know if this is true or not] and Pitt. probably can't afford what his agent is asking for. Around the deadline, and the Bucs are out of it, they can put Garland on the block, like they did with Benson. Teams will overpay for a guy having a breakout yr, with a lower NL ERA coming from the AL and his higher ERA. But would they overpay for a Redman having an average yr in the 4.70 era range? Not likely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must have skipped over this. Say Garland is traded and has a good year in Pitt. If he's a FA after the yr [i don't know if this is true or not] and Pitt. probably can't afford what his agent is asking for. Around the deadline, and the Bucs are out of it, they can put Garland on the block, like they did with Benson. Teams will overpay for a guy having a breakout yr, with a lower NL ERA coming from the AL and his higher ERA. But would they overpay for a Redman having an average yr in the 4.70 era range? Not likely.

Eh, I don't know about these numbers you're throwing out here -- you suggest Benson was having a breakout year, but he had an era of 4.22 when he was traded. Which is pretty close to what you said Redman could do in the NL (4.3). Yet here he has a 4.7.... :P

 

Benson still has this #1 overall pick buzz -- I wouldn't count on quite the same return for Garland, even though he's probably just as good a pitcher. And NY was desperate. Last few days shows they still are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eh, I don't know about these numbers you're throwing out here -- you suggest Benson was having a breakout year, but he had an era of 4.22 when he was traded.  Which is pretty close to what you said Redman could do in the NL (4.3).  Yet here he has a 4.7....  :P

 

Benson still has this #1 overall pick buzz -- I wouldn't count on quite the same return for Garland, even though he's probably just as good a pitcher.  And NY was desperate.  Last few days shows they still are.

Benson did have a "breakout year"---for him anyway. He was one of the biggest SP's out there teams wanted to get at the deadline [who knows why, but he was wanted by a lot of teams]. My point was Garland could post an ERA under 4.00 and teams would drool over him like they did Benson if Pitt. put him on the block to get a return on their investment if they couldn't or wouldn't sign him to a long term contract

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Benson did have a "breakout year"---for him anyway. He was one of the biggest SP's out there teams wanted to get at the deadline [who knows why, but he was wanted by a lot of teams]. My point was Garland could post an ERA under 4.00 and teams would drool over him like they did Benson if Pitt. put him on the block to get a return on their investment if they couldn't or wouldn't sign him to a long term contract

I just don't think Garland has quite the same 'following', for whatever the reason. Maybe it's Anna, I don't know.

 

Still, that's not a best-case, but at least a pretty good-case scenario for Garland. If he's got a 4.70 era (not unimaginable), or a 5, you get little in a trade, and not much relief in arbitration -- maybe he's non-tendered. If you have Redman, you have a pretty consistent guy, you figure he averages 4.5 in the NL over the next 2 seasons. It's boring, but that stability might be worth the extra cost, which isn't too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kris Benson is singlehandedly the most over-rated pitcher in baseball.  The Mets were morons for giving up the prospects they did to get him from Pittsburgh and the Mets were even bigger morons for giving him a 3 year deal worth a little more then 7 million a year.

Absolutely correct! I was stunned when I saw the $$$ the Mets gave him. Its absurd. #1 overall pick or not, he has not merited that type of deal at this point in his career, not even close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you guys notice after that omar vizquel deal and KW said he was mad that news got out that he was one of their targeted guys we really havent heard much of anything of what we are going after...So i expect a complete shocking move from him and anyone thats close to being on the trading block is a possibility when we are talking about the one known as Kenny Williams... This offseason can be very exciting or very boring like last year but KW is so damn unpredictable at times that its almost useless to go off of rumors involved with the white sox.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's seems to me that Garland should have more trade value than Benson had at the deadline. Benson had been iffy health and performance wise. Yet Garland has at least proven he could be a solid inning eater, has stayed healthy, plus has the potential to be a good ML pitcher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

all i can say is im glad im not the GM of the sox

 

heh

 

i would have a very hard time trading garland as i think he is right now one of the best #5 starters in the leauge. he also has the potential to break out and show us what we have all been waiting for.

 

i would just be hard pressed to trade that away and open another hole in our rotation. not having a solid starter at the back end of our rotation as we do now is hard enough... having TWO gaping holes in the rotation would be even harder

 

our biggest need right now IMO is to get a front end starter ( a #2 or #3 starter ) without trading any pitching.... getting a free agent would be ideal.. then trading paul konerko for someone with a high OBP

 

hopefully it will happen like this, but i doubt it will

Link to comment
Share on other sites

****It is unclear whether the A's would keep Kendall or trade him to another team, possibly the Dodgers. But the Dodgers, seeking to re-sign free-agent third baseman Adrian Beltre and add starting pitching, may want to address other needs before catcher.

 

 

 

If a deal goes down, there could be some chance of us getting Kendall. I dont know if we would deal with Oakland, or we would have what they want.

The athletics intention is to keep him from every thing i have read. They would not give up one of the big three if they were not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...