southsider2k5 Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Jan 10, 2005 -> 11:02 PM) It's a well known fact that Lee's value was high enough to fetch a #1 or #2 pitcher for the CWS. This was written up by Gammons himself. Think about that in terms of what we got for him. As someone said above Lee's value was higher than that of Koney's. So if this was a salary dump why not Koney over Lee? Look at all our 2B options we are discussing now. Any one of those players would have been thrown in with a relief pitcher & a PTBNL for Lee. That was likely the starting price for Lee. For less than the $9 million that we are putting out in payroll for the guys we have now? And then who would be our C, RP, and LF that would be filling those rolls? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChWRoCk2 Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 i would have rather gotten money out of the deal instead of some snub minor league player ive never heard of Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 QUOTE(chi-guy2 @ Jan 11, 2005 -> 10:14 AM) i would have rather gotten money out of the deal instead of some snub minor league player ive never heard of Just consider who we were trading with. Money was not an option, I'm sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 11, 2005 -> 10:21 AM) Just consider who we were trading with. Money was not an option, I'm sure. A better prospect should have been doable. Perhaps someone off AA or AAA not High A would have made this closer IMHO. What I like the most about this team is the pitching and having a decent potential lead off guy. Downside, we overpaid for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greasywheels121 Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 I really don't think what the PTBNL ever does is going to have much of a effect on who wins this deal or how successful this deal is for the Sox. I know not everyone sees it this way, but I really see it as Lee being traded for Pods, Vizcaino and eveyone else we've gotten since the trade thanks to the freeing of salary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChWRoCk2 Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 ricky weeks would have been nice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 I can see both sides of this debate. There is certainly some validation to the point that Carlos Lee was worth more than we received from Milwaukee. There is also the very valid point that we also "got" Hernandez and Pierzynski as a result of this trade. Taking into consideration the stuff that came out about Carlos immediately after the trade, perhaps KW decided to strike before the stuff leaked out and lowered his trade value. Perhaps it came out only because the trade had been made. We don't know about all that. So, basically, we don't have all the information to make an informed, intelligent judgement about the trade. All in all, it looks pretty damn good for us at this point and that's about all, as fans, we can expect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 11, 2005 -> 10:35 AM) I can see both sides of this debate. There is certainly some validation to the point that Carlos Lee was worth more than we received from Milwaukee. There is also the very valid point that we also "got" Hernandez and Pierzynski as a result of this trade. Taking into consideration the stuff that came out about Carlos immediately after the trade, perhaps KW decided to strike before the stuff leaked out and lowered his trade value. Perhaps it came out only because the trade had been made. We don't know about all that. So, basically, we don't have all the information to make an informed, intelligent judgement about the trade. All in all, it looks pretty damn good for us at this point and that's about all, as fans, we can expect. As trades go it wasn't unreasonable. I just expected a top 15 prospect, possibly a pitcher. Teams now practically reinvent themselves each year and forgetting the past is almost manditory. I feel a dump everyone and sign free agents mood this off season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 One thing I will say in KW's defense is that we don't know how much Rowand is going to cost. That in my opinion is the primary factor in trading Lee over Koney. If the decision was made to keep Rowand then dumping Lee is the next obvious choice. Rowand is now in the Byrnes category for salary & should be expected to make millions next year. If reports are true then we should expect to hear KW announce Rowand being signed to a 1-2 yr deal for no less than 5M/yr. It doesn't change the fact that KW should have gotten much more for Lee, but it does point to the fact that KW had to trade Lee to accomodate Rowand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
103 mph screwball Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 I'm not sure if the Sox "won" the trade or not. All I know is that I'm thrilled to have Pods, AJ, Hernandez, and Visciano on the 25 man in place of Lee, Burke, Girilli, and Diaz/Munoz. Therefore I'm glad it happened and I can't wait to get see this team. If this Hilton guy has any value, it's a bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 Where any of these guys signed with the "Maggs money" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 11, 2005 -> 11:56 AM) Where any of these guys signed with the "Maggs money" Garcia and contreras were. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 Take a look at the MLB Win Share report. Lee tops the CWS & the ALC. http://casdra.com/win_shares/ws_all.php I hate the trade even more now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 I always try and stop and realize that trades aren't about the past, it's about the future. I always liked Lee's upside. We'll compare in October. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Jan 11, 2005 -> 02:27 PM) Add A.J and El Duque onto that list. KW obviously didn't make the deal for those 2 players alone, otherwise it would have fallen into the Jim Bowden and Brian Sabean territory of bone headed moves this off-season. i reread your post and please forgive but i still don't understand what you are meaning. it sounds interesting thou Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 11, 2005 -> 02:40 PM) For less than the $9 million that we are putting out in payroll for the guys we have now? And then who would be our C, RP, and LF that would be filling those rolls? so you are saying the clee tade was for a. salary dump where we can use the money elsewhere b. getting in players as fillers c. letting the sox pr machine take it and make it sound as this was the a trade that was great for us, where every one in the baseball world is saying we, the sox got taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 There's no use crying about it. It's all going to come down to Pods. If he improves to his 2003 form it was a good trade if he declines further from 2004 this trade sucked big time. I do find it interesting that as much as Pods declined in 04 he still contributed to more than 20% of the B's wins. That's more than Dye did for Oak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Jan 11, 2005 -> 09:55 PM) There's no use crying about it. It's all going to come down to Pods. If he improves to his 2003 form it was a good trade if he declines further from 2004 this trade sucked big time. I do find it interesting that as much as Pods declined in 04 he still contributed to more than 20% of the B's wins. That's more than Dye did for Oak. so who is crying, i believe we were all talking in a positive light about the trade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 I feel better about Pods. In the win share thread I did some number-crunching & found that Pods actually increased his impact # from 03 to 04. Pretty significant since his avg dropped from 313 to 244. In 03 he scored or had an rbi in 71 games. In 04 he upped that to 83. Lee has such an impact in 92 games for the CWS in 04. If Pods can do that we should be in good shape. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Zelig Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 If we win the division this year, will everyone then agree that this was a good trade? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 QUOTE(Leonard Zelig @ Jan 12, 2005 -> 01:42 AM) If we win the division this year, will everyone then agree that this was a good trade? Probably not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 QUOTE(Leonard Zelig @ Jan 12, 2005 -> 01:42 AM) If we win the division this year, will everyone then agree that this was a good trade? Probably not. If we win the World Series in 4 games it may quiet a critic or two . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 13, 2005 -> 01:08 AM) Probably not. If we win the World Series in 4 games it may quiet a critic or two . . . What about 5, 6 or 7 games there Tex. Will you give a bit of leeway then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Jan 12, 2005 -> 08:11 AM) What about 5, 6 or 7 games there Tex. Will you give a bit of leeway then? Not if it's against the Cubs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Jan 12, 2005 -> 08:11 AM) What about 5, 6 or 7 games there Tex. Will you give a bit of leeway then? I'm just talking about quieting the critics. If it takes 5, 6, or 7 games it better not be an "El" Series 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.