beck72 Posted December 16, 2004 Author Share Posted December 16, 2004 That's like saying: 5 + 10 + 10 + 10 > 2 + 10 + 10 + 10 Your inequality could be simplified by: Vazquez > Garland Thank you. You post the way you want, I'll post the way I want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kogs35 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. he also had the pettite signing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Showtime Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 It'll be 100 at least... And a million hits on the site, unless it crashes. It would be a great test for the site. Hopefully Bruce will have some more news as the day goes on here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaseballNick Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 If wouldn't be pissed if we give up Anderson as part of a deal to land a front line starter. I don't think Anderson is going to be a perennial All-Star when he gets called up. Sweeney is our prized jewel. Anyway, I don't think Vazquez is the guy we need. We need a guy like Hudson for a top level prospect. Anderson is too much to give up for Vazquez. Would I give him up in a Hudson deal? YES. Vazquez? NO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelatinoheat_30 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 i hope we don't trade konerko in a deal for vazquez, or anderson for rj. and if we get rid of carl, who plays dh while frank is out? gload? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shagar69 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 i hope we don't trade konerko in a deal for vazquez, or anderson for rj. and if we get rid of carl, who plays dh while frank is out? gload? i would GLADLY trade anderson in a deal for RJ. i wouldnt even think about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelatinoheat_30 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 If wouldn't be pissed if we give up Anderson as part of a deal to land a front line starter. I don't think Anderson is going to be a perennial All-Star when he gets called up. Sweeney is our prized jewel. Anyway, I don't think Vazquez is the guy we need. We need a guy like Hudson for a top level prospect. Anderson is too much to give up for Vazquez. Would I give him up in a Hudson deal? YES. Vazquez? NO i agree. only give up anderson in a hudson deal, not for vazquez. but i wouldn't really wanna trade him for rj either, but then again i don't know that much about anderson except that he's our top prospect. but you say sweeney is the prized jewel, i thought anderson was. will sweeney be a better player than anderson? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf 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... The Score? Well that officially eliminates any chance of the Sox being interested in RJ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.J. Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 can we put Carl in the deal for vazquez, and get the yanks to pay some of V's Salary? That would be so sweet! We might still have $ left for one more key signing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Showtime Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 The Score? Well that officially eliminates any chance of the Sox being interested in RJ. For the 3rd time today, the Score is using the USA Today report. Not some "inside" info. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southside hitmen Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 If the Sox can still sign Clement or Perez and get Vasquez,Hudson or RJ in a trade we will have the best rotation in baseball to go along with a solid bullpen.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 That's like saying: 5 + 10 + 10 + 10 > 2 + 10 + 10 + 10 Your inequality could be simplified by: Vazquez > Garland Thank you. I was told there would be no math Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilJester99 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 I will only believe this when I see its offical... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 I was told there would be no math I'm an engineer, I can't help it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlackSox8 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 If the Sox can still sign Clement or Perez and get Vasquez,Hudson or RJ in a trade we will have the best rotation in baseball to go along with a solid bullpen.. Hudson.if they can get him somehow...get him...i don't care who else they get, they can get no one else for all i care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 For the 3rd time today, the Score is using the USA Today report. Not some "inside" info. Whew, that was a close one. KW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 i hope we don't trade konerko in a deal for vazquez, or anderson for rj. and if we get rid of carl, who plays dh while frank is out? gload? Fair question, let me add something here or remind on this topic - There will be TONS of non-tenders next week. Two names already are out there, one possibly and one for sure - Gibbons of the Orioles and Cleveland let go of Josh Phelps a day or so ago. Both are 1B/corner OF/DH types. Not necessarily advocating bringing one or the other in, but there'll be lots of talent available in January. Lots. By the way, Phelps can really hit. He's the guy they got from Toronto. On this particular subject, things are heating up. Clement is supposed to decide imminently, like Friday (tomorrow). Personally I expect all sorts of player movement by Xmas, or more accurately, next Wed. Baseball will pretty much shut down starting Thursday afternoon and I'd bet for most of the following week. And then pick up again right after New Years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaseballNick Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 You know what? At one time in the not too distant past, Joe Borchard was our top prospect!!! Prospects have proven NOTHING, that's why they are prospects. Proven MLB players are just that... proven. I'd take my risks on a young proven player anyday over a Brian Anderson. But that's just me. We may be hanging on to the next Joe Borchard for all we know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelasDaddy0427 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 I don't get why some of you still thinks it's possible for us to get RJ.... I mean look at the deal Arizona wants... Jon Garland (24 year old, 3 years under his belt, great upside) Major League Starting Out Fielder (AKA Aaron Rowand, if you think they will take Pods, Borchard, or Everett your INSANE) Damaso Marte Top Prospect (Brian Anderson or Ryan Sweeney) ....Anyone who thinks we should give up that for a 41 year old pitcher is nuts. Not only that it leaves no money for a 5th starter. No money for an offensive upgrade anywhere. If Kenny does that he needs to be fired :puke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 Fair question, let me add something here or remind on this topic - There will be TONS of non-tenders next week. Two names already are out there, one possibly and one for sure - Gibbons of the Orioles and Cleveland let go of Josh Phelps a day or so ago. Both are 1B/corner OF/DH types. Not necessarily advocating bringing one or the other in, but there'll be lots of talent available in January. Lots. By the way, Phelps can really hit. He's the guy they got from Toronto. On this particular subject, things are heating up. Clement is supposed to decide imminently, like Friday (tomorrow). Personally I expect all sorts of player movement by Xmas, or more accurately, next Wed. Baseball will pretty much shut down starting Thursday afternoon and I'd bet for most of the following week. And then pick up again right after New Years. So I ask in return, why would Arizona accept Carl Everett if they know there are going to be some good outfielders available? They made an offer to David Dellucci, and are trying to sign Jeromy Burnitz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 I'm an engineer, I can't help it. You, too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan562004 Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 FWIW ESPN 12:40 update, both local and national said nothing about RJ... Local said Sox are mildly interested in AJ (the Catcher with the funky last name I'm too hungover to try and spell), but have concerns about his attitude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 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. Everett is still a major league hitter that would be a good DH especially if Frank is out. I would say there is a good argument to be made that Vazquez may not be a a better pitcher this year than Garland and WE STILL HAVE A HOLE IN THE ROTATION and no money to fill it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punch and Judy Garland Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 According to Phil Rogers and BA, Anderson is a better prospect thatn Sweeney. That said, Anderson has had some minor injury troubles over the last few years and he really was struggaling (namath emphasis) during the AFL. In addition, Ozzie and KW seem to just love Sweeney. So while Anderson is our top prospect by outsiders, I bet the organization has Ryan as our #1 guy. Luckliy for us, others have Anderson as our #1 so we could trade the guy we don't feel is our best guy. It seldon works out that nicely. On a previous note, I may have been wrong about Clemens. Maybe it was just Pettite or both. It's sorta hazy because it all happened so fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santo=dorf Posted December 16, 2004 Share Posted December 16, 2004 You, too? Aren't all Sox fans? :fyou Classes though 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.