beck72 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 On the updates, the ESPN 1000 announcer has said a few times that Bruce Levine believes RJ could be traded by the end of today. If its true, its probably to the NYY, with the Sox involved [getting Vazquez]. Few other names have been mentioned surrounding RJ to get a deal done so quickly. While it's an outside shot the sox would land RJ, its possible. Whatever happens both Vazquez and RJ are better SP's than Clement [esp at his reported $10 mill a yr deal]. I can live with Vazquez at some $8 mill/ yr, but not at his full 3 yrs, $34 mill price tag. So money from the Yanks should be part of any deal. If the more likely scenario happens and the Sox get Vazquez in the deal who would likely be in the deal? My bet--Garland, Everett, and a top 10 prospect [Anderson?]. Thoughts? [The RJ scenario has been played out on multiple threads. So this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UofIChiSox Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Hey, I don't post too often in the offseason, too many rumors and little real action for my taste, but I was just wondering if there is any chance Konerko would be involved as well. I hope not, because I felt it was time to deal Lee or Konerko, not Lee and Konerko. Thanks for the info. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Then we still have the 5th starter hole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Very interesting to say the least... Levine was right on about Lee/SPod, I wonder what he knows here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSGuy406 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Garland, Anderson, and Everett for Vazquez? I'm sorry, but that's way too much. If you make that trade, you're still at step one, because again -- you only have four capable starters. Giving up Garland (for Vazquez), as well as Anderson, does absolutely nothing for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Yeah, unless it is the White Sox getting Randy, I don't feel very comfortable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 16, 2004 Author Share Posted December 16, 2004 Hey, I don't post too often in the offseason, too many rumors and little real action for my taste, but I was just wondering if there is any chance Konerko would be involved as well. I hope not, because I felt it was time to deal Lee or Konerko, not Lee and Konerko. Thanks for the info. I doubt Pk would go. But a guy like Brian Anderson to AZ [who went to college there] would be a good PR and baseball move for the D-Backs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaseballNick Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 I'd love to dump Everett on some other team, but we all know in the back of our minds that we'll end up trading for him again in June. I'm not crazy about getting Vazquez and his Garland-like ERA. Not only this, but we'd be trading Garland to get him, leaving a hole in the rotation. This deal for Vazquez doesn't do much for the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatchetman Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 I'd rather see Konerko and his $8.5 salary go than Anderson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilJester99 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 I wouldn't give up all that just for Vazquez... even with the Yanks paying some....KW has to get more than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Garland, Anderson, and Everett for Vazquez? I'm sorry, but that's way too much. If you make that trade, you're still at step one, because again -- you only have four capable starters. Giving up Garland (for Vazquez), as well as Anderson, does absolutely nothing for me. When I got home at like 3:00 a.m. this morning (hey my finals are over...) I threw on ESPN Radio and the update said something along the lines of AZ and NY talking again... so this may be it, I would bet the White Sox are involved in some 3-way though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 16, 2004 Author Share Posted December 16, 2004 Garland, Anderson, and Everett for Vazquez? I'm sorry, but that's way too much. If you make that trade, you're still at step one, because again -- you only have four capable starters. Giving up Garland (for Vazquez), as well as Anderson, does absolutely nothing for me. Vazquez, Buerhle, Freddy, and Jose C >>>>> than MB, Freddy, Jose and Garland I agree it leaves a hole at the 5th spot. But the key is getting a #1 or a #2 based around Garland [Anderson would be tough to lose. But I'd rather it be an OFer than B-Mac who could pitch for the sox in 2005]. The 5th spot could be filled by a non-tender [like a Jarrod Washburn, etc], or Schoeneweis, or an innings eater. If the Sox can get a guy like Vazquez for less than Clement, I'd do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 The thing with this move, we still need a #5. If we are not getting Johnson this trade blows. Unless it is Garland for Vazquez straight-up or we are getting Vazquez and signing Clement then it works. Last week by making this trade, we solidifed our rotation and look a little hit to payroll. Now we do not need the payroll so as stated in an other thread, the Sox can overpay via free agency but not with professional talent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 16, 2004 Author Share Posted December 16, 2004 Very interesting to say the least... Levine was right on about Lee/SPod, I wonder what he knows here. Why would a CHI reporter know about a possible RJ deal [esp not coming from the winter meetings] if the sox weren't involved in some way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Why would a CHI reporter know about a possible RJ deal [esp not coming from the winter meetings] if the sox weren't involved in some way? I am sure he has contacts around the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilJester99 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 On the report for the Score is still saying the Sox are trying to land RJ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ISF Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Nobody is taking Everett's sorry ass contract from us. Certainly not Arizona. Garland and Cotts would be enough on our end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 16, 2004 Author Share Posted December 16, 2004 The thing with this move, we still need a #5. If we are not getting Johnson this trade blows. Unless it is Garland for Vazquez straight-up or we are getting Vazquez and signing Clement then it works. Wouldn't Garland be part of deal for RJ, leaving a hole in the 5th spot? I know RJ is better than Vazquez. But isn't Vazquez arguably better [stuff wise, upside wise] than MB and Freddy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upnorthsox Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 I'd love to dump Everett on some other team, but we all know in the back of our minds that we'll end up trading for him again in June. I'm not crazy about getting Vazquez and his Garland-like ERA. Not only this, but we'd be trading Garland to get him, leaving a hole in the rotation. This deal for Vazquez doesn't do much for the team. Given the choice between paying Vazquez or paying Clement all that money, it's Vazquez hands down. It's keeping Garland or having the chance to get rid of Everett that's the tough call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Vazquez, Buerhle, Freddy, and Jose C >>>>> than MB, Freddy, Jose and Garland That's like saying: 5 + 10 + 10 + 10 > 2 + 10 + 10 + 10 Your inequality could be simplified by: Vazquez > Garland Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Showtime Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Now I'm excitied, I hope to come home from work tonight and see a 75 page thread about Randy coming to the Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Showtime Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 On the report for the Score is still saying the Sox are trying to land RJ... That's off of the USA Today story I posted yesterday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 16, 2004 Author Share Posted December 16, 2004 Nobody is taking Everett's sorry ass contract from us. Certainly not Arizona. Garland and Cotts would be enough on our end. No. No. Welcome to Soxtalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punch and Judy Garland Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Bruce was the first to report Clemens signing with the stros' last eyar so he certainly has contacts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Now I'm excitied, I hope to come home from work tonight and see a 75 page thread about Randy coming to the Sox. It'll be 100 at least... And a million hits on the site, unless it crashes. 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.