quickman Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Jun 3, 2005 -> 06:33 PM) I will remind you again of Chavez contract signed this past yr: $66M/6yr. He's earning $8M this year which leaves $58M/5yr left. He's not performing any where near that level right now. Which means the contract is a major hurt against his trade value right now. BMac on the other hand has the highest trade value of his career right now. Right now there isn't a team in the league who doesn't see his potential as #1/#2 SP. He's the buzz of the organization right now. Chavez & his contract are simply not worth the price of trading BMac. KW should be able to get this done (if Beane is really pressing to unload the contract) without BMac. But I don't think Beane is conceding yet in the ALW. They are 10 gms out, riding a 4 gm winning streak & are winning at home. Last night Chavez hit a game winning grand slam. I think he'll wait until after Jun to see whether he's a buyer or a seller for the 2nd half. Agreed again. crede and another 1 or two other prospects without BMAC will probably get this done. If not they will turn to randa. But I rally beleive they will get someone. its the most logical place to upgrade a bat in the lineup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Jun 3, 2005 -> 05:00 PM) So let me get this straight. The "rumor" supposedly came from a caller on a radio show or someone on a message board saying Ken Rosenthal said it was a deal being discussed. Rosenthal was emailed and said he had no knowledge of said rumor. BB said it was BS. Chavez said it was BS, and that he did not want to play in Chicago. KW didn't say it was BS but said he isn't trading the main ingredient of said deal, therefore making it BS, and there still are people here that think this rumor still has validity? It's a valid rumor because it makes sense for both parties. You're kidding yourself if you think there is nothing to it just because the parties involved say nothing is going to happen, of course they're going to say that, what would you expect?? Now don't get me wrong I'm not saying a trade is going to happen but just because Chavez says he's not going anywhere and kenny says nothing is going to happen means absolutely nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jun 3, 2005 -> 05:44 PM) It's a valid rumor because it makes sense for both parties. You're kidding yourself if you think there is nothing to it just because the parties involved say nothing is going to happen, of course they're going to say that, what would you expect?? Now don't get me wrong I'm not saying a trade is going to happen but just because Chavez says he's not going anywhere and kenny says nothing is going to happen means absolutely nothing. Your kidding yourself if you buy an unsubstaniated rumor from which there is no source over the horse's mouth. Edited June 3, 2005 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabroni Posted June 3, 2005 Share Posted June 3, 2005 Your kidding yourself if you buy an unsubstaniated rumor from which there is no source over the horse's mouth. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The horse's mouth wouldn't be stupid enough to show their cards and lower the trade value of their players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 QUOTE(Jabroni @ Jun 3, 2005 -> 05:51 PM) The horse's mouth wouldn't be stupid enough to show their cards and lower the trade value of their players. How much did BMac's trade value rise when KW said he isn't trading him? How much did Chavez's trade value rise when Beane said he isn't trading him? The answer is it didn't do squat. If you want to move a player you want everyone who would be interested to know he could be had if the price was right. You don't want to say he's not available and not have teams inquire. That would be like stores not advertising their sales, or not even advertising at all. There are very few teams that could or would take on Chavez's contract. You don't want to negotiate with one team exclusively. What exactly is Chavez accomplishing saying he doesn't even want to play in Chicago? You would think if he wanted to play here he would say it, putting Beane in a corner, and lowering his value to make his wish come true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 It's a valid rumor because it makes sense for both parties. You're kidding yourself if you think there is nothing to it just because the parties involved say nothing is going to happen, of course they're going to say that, what would you expect?? Now don't get me wrong I'm not saying a trade is going to happen but just because Chavez says he's not going anywhere and kenny says nothing is going to happen means absolutely nothing. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Chavez talk has dominated the board so just let me say I disagree with you. BMac is not a pressing need for the A's. They just spent Hudson & Mulder in the off-season to re-vamp their rotation. Beane is not stupid. He knows ATL has one of the best track records for developing young starters & STL is not far behind them. He went to perenial contenders to re-vamp his rotation. Dotel is out for the season & his RF Swisher sucks. In my opinion that places Anderson & a WSox RP has of greater importance to Beane than BMac. If Kenny is willing to spend Politte/Marte in an effort to get Chavez he can probably pull this off. Someone could emerge from AAA for the pen, El Duque could move to the pen & BMac into the rotation, or KW could spin another deal for a proven RP. It would have to be to a contender that is deep with RP & in need of HR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulokis Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 No matter what, I liked what KW said that he is not trading BMAC. What happens if the Cuban connection gets beat up and gets older (whoops, sorry it happens already) who would we have. For me, BMAC should stay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 I think KW has cleared this up rather nicely. Bmac will be around this yr. Any deals could and should be made w/o him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drowninginflame Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 I like Bmac and I hope he's here for a long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddy Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 QUOTE(Steff @ Jun 3, 2005 -> 04:57 PM) Miguel Olivo wasn't going anywhere either.. :rolly it ups his trade value if the GM 'doesnt want him to leave' classic trick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkman delivers Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 I just wanted to point out that Chavez is actually starting to heat up. In the past week he's batting .296 with a .367 OBP, .519 SLG, and .885 OPS. And so far today he's 2 for 3 against Roy Halladay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kev211 Posted June 4, 2005 Share Posted June 4, 2005 QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Jun 3, 2005 -> 10:50 PM) I just wanted to point out that Chavez is actually starting to heat up. In the past week he's batting .296 with a .367 OBP, .519 SLG, and .885 OPS. And so far today he's 2 for 3 against Roy Halladay. we should also point out that Bmac isnt doing the great in triple a. From what i have heard he got the loss tonight not sure 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.