fathom Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 There's a lot of teams in the market still for a big-time pitcher. Teams like the Reds (and my boy Adam Dunn), the Cardinals, and others would definitely be interested in acquiring Garland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R.J. Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 It does sound like most of these names are writers filling out their column. Nobody has been concrete in reporting who would go, it's just "pitching" or "an outfielder" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish71 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:36 AM) I'm not advocating the deal, I'm just citing what would happen. So we're still not on the same page. Damn you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 Just a little quote from this page to put things into perspective. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> There's no perspective there. He speculates the Tigers, and Vazquez turned down that deal, he has Detroit on the no trade list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:37 AM) Damn you One of these days si, it will happen..I promise you. When, I'm not exactly sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitlesswonder Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(R.J. @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:29 AM) Despite the surplus of starters it'd give us (which is not all that bad guys), El Duque + Young would be something we should do. Barring a career renaissance as a middle reliever, El Duque is not going to be of much use to us at all. And god bless Chris Young, he's a fantastic prospect, but we have outfielders all over the place and 3 spots to play them. Garland + Young is absolutely friggin ridiculous. That's a slap in the face. I have to disagree. With Young gone, the only real CF prospect in the system is Anderson. I'd rather keep Young in case Anderson fails to perform this season. Neither Sweeney (sp?) or Owens is supposed to be good enough defensively to handle CF. Also, I wouldn't be shocked to see McCarthy pitch at least as well as Vasquez this year for 11M less. I'd hate to see him in AAA or the bullpen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:37 AM) What do we need? Trade Garland for a CF? Who? BTW, I hate you. Yes, no green. Maybe a CF and a stud reliever, not sure but we wouldn't keep Jon if we traded for Vaz, I'll guarantee you that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(R.J. @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:34 AM) Just a little quote from this page to put things into perspective. Maybe Gonzales is on it, but Rosenthal has been right on all year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 Remember what the Dbacks supposedly had lined up for Vazquez.....Granderson and a top pitching prospect. I highly doubt they would want Duque in a trade, as they're loading up more for about 2 or 3 years from now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 Just to add fuel to the fire, the Dbacks love Brian Anderson. Just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maggsmaggs Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 The only way I trade for Vaz is if it doesn't involve Garland or Count. Then, we swing Garland or Count for a Carl Crawford or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 The only way I trade for Vaz is if it doesn't involve Garland or Count. Then, we swing Garland or Count for a Carl Crawford or something. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well this is nice to say and all, but why would Tampa trade a stud OF for a pitcher one year away from free agency, it doesn't make sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitlesswonder Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:41 AM) Remember what the Dbacks supposedly had lined up for Vazquez.....Granderson and a top pitching prospect. I highly doubt they would want Duque in a trade, as they're loading up more for about 2 or 3 years from now. I agree. And AZ definitely wants a CF. Garland and Young/Anderson is probably about the same value as Zumaya & Granderson. I thought that would be terrible trade for Detriot. And I think it would be bad for the Sox, too. Does anyone know why Vasquez is till so highly regarded? At this point, it's not like he just had a bad half-season in NY. He hasn;t pitched well in a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R.J. Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 The guy's Detroit prediction is more than a little misguided, but I'd listen to what any Sox beat writer has to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxmanager Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 i remember the days when the whitesox would make absolutely 0 deals to make the team better. used to drive me crazy. now i wish they would make no deals and all KW does is play fantasy baseball. i will say it again, "you have to know when to hold em, know when to fold em." KW is in unchartered territery with the former. i just pray that the day doesnt come when our beloved players dont come back to beat us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(whitesoxmanager @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 11:46 AM) and all KW does is play fantasy baseball. :headshake :headshake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 Garland and Young for Vazquez? The Sox would be willing to pay $16 million or more (considering what is left on Vazquez's deal and what Garland would get in arbitration) just to have a guy who has been mediocre at best the last year and a half signed 1 additional season, and give up one of their top prospects? Why don't they just give Garland a 2 year deal worth $20 million and keep Young? They would still come out $4 million ahead. This whole thing I thought was far-fetched, but Rosenthal has been pretty accurate for a while now, and his scenerio is scaring me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatScott82 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 05:45 PM) Well this is nice to say and all, but why would Tampa trade a stud OF for a pitcher one year away from free agency, it doesn't make sense. That makes no sense- but an attractive package of Garland, Anderson and Fields for Crawford would work. This of course would have to be after the Vaz for Duque and Young Wow i love speculating. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(Dick Allen @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 05:53 PM) Garland and Young for Vazquez? The Sox would be willing to pay $16 million or more (considering what is left on Vazquez's deal and what Garland would get in arbitration) just to have a guy who has been mediocre at best the last year and a half signed 1 additional season, and give up one of their top prospects? Why don't they just give Garland a 2 year deal worth $20 million and keep Young? They would still come out $4 million ahead. This whole thing I thought was far-fetched, but Rosenthal has been pretty accurate for a while now, and his scenerio is scaring me. No doubt, that would be a disaster of a trade. Just like when the whole Burnett trade speculation started, I get the same feeling where I just want to say "KW, please stay the f*** away from the DBacks!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(GreatScott82 @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 05:56 PM) That makes no sense- but an attractive package of Garland, Anderson and Fields for Crawford would work. This of course would have to be after the Vaz for Duque and Young Wow i love speculating. Maybe it's me, but I'm not a big fan of giving up basically our entire farm system this offseason! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 01:25 PM) I definitely don't want to see this deal go down. If we're going to trade Contreras or Garland at peak value, at least the pitcher we get should be someone with a good contract/value. For his contract, Vazquez is not that person. Also, I think if they trade Garland, you're basically writing Buehrle's ticket out of town when his contract is up also. I disagree. Jon would likely get a deal better than MB's. Would you want to pay Jon more than MB? Could you blame MB if he wanted a deal better than Jon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 Does anyone think that Garland does not want to stay? Maybe this is the crux of the issue? He is from southern California. His fiancee is from Hawaii per The Underground. He knows damn well he can get a great contract after '06, as good as or better than what the White Sox are offering. Why is this a mystery that the White Sox are potentially shopping him? It shouldn't be. As for "beloved former players", give me a break. Players come and go. Keep getting attached to them, good for you, you'll get a broken heart every time. The front of the jersey is more important than the back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 Let me add this. Assuming Chris Young and Ryan Sweeney and Jerry Owens are as good as Guillen has said, why do you need Brian Anderson after 2006? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatScott82 Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 06:01 PM) Maybe it's me, but I'm not a big fan of giving up basically our entire farm system this offseason! fathom, its just pure speculation. we are not going to acquire a CFer. Anderson is here to stay. But how can you not want Crawford on your team? He's an all around gamer. Lets see how this Vazquez rumor unfolds. Remember its just a rumor. Our team is almost set right now. But you never know with KW. Our only hole right now is a lefty reliever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted December 13, 2005 Share Posted December 13, 2005 QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 13, 2005 -> 06:04 PM) Let me add this. Assuming Chris Young and Ryan Sweeney and Jerry Owens are as good as Guillen has said, why do you need Brian Anderson after 2006? For a right fielder? Owens and Sweeney don't project to have much power. Of course, it's not like the Sox have a great track record of developing players into stars anyways. 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.