Punch and Judy Garland Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 06:50 PM) If we can get a stud pitcher on the verge, but about a year away, and some solid nonOF position player prospects I would love a deal. I'd love to see the Sox get a 3B or 2B prospect, and maybe a Catching prospect. I agree, we likely do not have the catcher, 2B, SS, or 3B that will be on this team in 2008. It'd be nice if we could get that Hanley-Barfield type that we could hang our future hopes on in the infield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 QUOTE(Punch and Judy Garland @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 02:55 PM) He very well may be because Stoneman has shown a reluctance for moving prospects that you don't see from Big market teams by and large. I do however think you could get someone near that ilk for Garland. I mentioned Wood because the Angels are a natural fit since he'd want to resign there and some of the Angels prospects (Mathis, Kotchman, Morales) play positions we won't trade for. I don't know as much about Hendrick or Aybar but I'm sure our scouting staff knows a bit about them Stoneman's an idiot, but he isn't going to trade Wood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punch and Judy Garland Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 06:53 PM) Remember, we can always let him walk and get 2 high draft picks for him (although that won't result in immediate help to our farm system, its a good way to start). I like the draft pick method better when its a guy like Randy Winn or Jacque Jones you let walk. You can't get a top 15 pick for him so that kinda hurts. MLB should let teams trade picks dammit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 QUOTE(Punch and Judy Garland @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 03:51 PM) No disagreement there. Wood is in that class with Delmon Young and pretty much no one else. Here's a legitimate question, and mind you it loses some steam as the Rays won't be able to sign Garland to an extension, but how about BJ Upton for Garland. They are yo-yo-ing Upton around as they have concerns with his erratic D. Just a thought. Another possible match is with Scott Kazmir. This is more realistic. Kazmir was offered for Alfonso Soriano (who is in the identical boat as Garland in terms of contract and resignability). It wouldn't really solve the glut of starting pitchers but would give us a guy we can control for a long time The Drays don't want a pitcher like Garland. They can't resign him. They want pitchers like McCarthy, young guys who they would control there rights for at least a few years. Basically put the Drays wouldn't trade us Carl Crawford for Garland, let alone BJ Upton, they have zero interest in Jon. The only thing they'd do with Jon is trade him to another team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punch and Judy Garland Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 06:55 PM) The Drays don't want a pitcher like Garland. They can't resign him. They want pitchers like McCarthy, young guys who they would control there rights for at least a few years. Basically put the Drays wouldn't trade us Carl Crawford for Garland, let alone BJ Upton, they have zero interest in Jon. The only thing they'd do with Jon is trade him to another team. I think you are saying what they should want. THe Soriano for Kazmir offer suggests something else Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted December 16, 2005 Share Posted December 16, 2005 QUOTE(Punch and Judy Garland @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 04:56 PM) I think you are saying what they should want. THe Soriano for Kazmir offer suggests something else That offer could just be BS speculation by the media though. The media reports a lot of crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumptious96 Posted December 17, 2005 Share Posted December 17, 2005 I'm leaning towards the group that wants Kenny to get some quality major league talent if he is going to deal Jon. In order of importance I'd like a stud bullpen arm, a good outfield bat, or an improvement in the left side of the INF. But, I'm skeptical of finding a match for those needs. I think that Jon's value in a trade for minor league talent won't change that much between now and the deadline, because there going to be alot of mediocre teams trying to make the playoffs in the NL. Also, if your going to get two high draft picks if you don't resign him at the end of the season, why not just let him pitch this year and say goodbye after this season. I think you can still get alot of value out of BMac by using him as a spot starter/pen arm and insurance for an injury in the way Buerhle was used in 2000. So, if I'm Kenny, I'm waiting for a deal that is better than Garland and Crede for Blalock and prospects. If its not out there, then I'd sit and wait for a prospect deal, whether its now or at the deadline, that blows my mind. I'm thinking along the lines of the desperate Beltran deal or a deal like Garcia with a window to resign. What I don't want to see is Kenny taking his best prospect deal now, because there are other FA pitchers out there and the teams your talking to now may get more desperate (prospect wise) down the line. And if not, you still have Gar for the rest of the year and two high draft picks after he walks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 QUOTE(spiderman @ Dec 15, 2005 -> 04:33 PM) After skimming through all the fun trade scenarios, whether it's trading Garland (and others) for Blalock, Tejada, Crawford, etc, would you be happy if Kenny Williams trades Garland for a good prospect or two ? I know the minor league system is one reason we were able to get Thome, and Vazquez, but I also want to repeat next season. I'd rather have Garland, and McCarthy out of the bullpen (as insurance in case of injury) then have the minor league system get reloaded (potentially). What say you ? Well, the going rate for Garland at the moment is supposedly two pitching prospects. If those two pitching prospects have produced and are talented, why not do it? I'd rather see a big name offensive player coming to the Sox, but the team was built on pitching and defense, so improving the pitching and/or defense further can only help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 QUOTE(Dam8610 @ Dec 17, 2005 -> 08:54 PM) Well, the going rate for Garland at the moment is supposedly two pitching prospects. If those two pitching prospects have produced and are talented, why not do it? I'd rather see a big name offensive player coming to the Sox, but the team was built on pitching and defense, so improving the pitching and/or defense further can only help. I think that makes good sense to me also...right now, it seems to me that offensive talent is expensive, but manageably expensive. PK at $12 million for example...he'll probably win more games altogether for our team than Buehrle next year, but if Buehrle hit the FA Market, he'd probably pull in even more money than PK. Right now, Pitching seems to be the thing to buy. When we have it, we should try to use it to get cheaper pitching. I don't like the idea of trading Jon, but if he won't sign with us, and the prospects are right, then I won't resist too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 I'm okay with prospects, as long as they are really good prospects - grade A prospects. My first preference would be to get a real top flight player; that looks doubtful, and we dont' need any mediocre small upgrades. I'd much prefer prospects to, say, trading him for someone like Blalock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 Who do you think are good candidates to make a Garland for 2 pitching specs trade? My leading candidate right now would be the Dodgers. They have quite a few good young pitching specs, they seem to want to contend right now, and they're on the west coast, which plays into their favor when trying to resign Garland. I'd love to get a couple of their pitching specs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChWRoCk2 Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(Dam8610 @ Dec 18, 2005 -> 01:42 AM) Who do you think are good candidates to make a Garland for 2 pitching specs trade? My leading candidate right now would be the Dodgers. They have quite a few good young pitching specs, they seem to want to contend right now, and they're on the west coast, which plays into their favor when trying to resign Garland. I'd love to get a couple of their pitching specs. dodgers have some good players, i like some of the mariners pitching spects as well as some of the astros, hard to say what is going to happen, id think having the season garland did you would want to sell him high now that he had such a good season and bring in alot of talent Possibility you could get some good mlb players for garland, rather than spects Edited December 18, 2005 by ChWRoCk2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BHAMBARONS Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 The Dodgers have some fine prospects like Broxton, Guzman, Young, Russell, LaRoche, Billingsley, Martin a fine defensive catcher. Broxton is guy who would a great fit he had a few major league innings under his belt and has a Bobby Jenks like Fastball along with a great slider could be a guy who could slip into this year's pen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 The Dodgers have some fine prospects like Broxton, Guzman, Young, Russell, LaRoche, Billingsley, Martin a fine defensive catcher. Broxton is guy who would a great fit he had a few major league innings under his belt and has a Bobby Jenks like Fastball along with a great slider could be a guy who could slip into this year's pen. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I agree, the Dodgers might be a good match. They've been busy getting all their position players handled and now might turn their attention to Garland. Coletti has the green light to spend some money and turn them around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGame Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 Do you think the Dodgers would trade ANDY LaROCHE, JONATHAN BROXTON, and RUSSELL MARTIN for Garland? Or some sort of combo like that? I would LOVE to have Andy LaRoche at 3B in the future at the Cell. Give me your opinions.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 QUOTE(JimH @ Dec 18, 2005 -> 03:29 PM) I agree, the Dodgers might be a good match. They've been busy getting all their position players handled and now might turn their attention to Garland. Coletti has the green light to spend some money and turn them around. I could see a healthy Greg Miller help the sox this yr in some capacity, even though he'd start in AA. A prospect like him and a guy like Broxton who could compete for a job in the sox pen this spring wouldn't be a bad trade for Jon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 I say keep Jon Garland regardless. Garland could give the Sox something this year that no prospect would. 20 wins! I'd much rather have a hungry Jon Garland (if the Sox truly believe he has turned the corner) winning games for the Sox and if he walks, so be it. Offer him arbitration and get two draft picks for him. With a good year this year, Garland could help the Sox himself in 2006 more than any trade scenario. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JimH Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 I say keep Jon Garland regardless. Garland could give the Sox something this year that no prospect would. 20 wins! I'd much rather have a hungry Jon Garland (if the Sox truly believe he has turned the corner) winning games for the Sox and if he walks, so be it. Offer him arbitration and get two draft picks for him. With a good year this year, Garland could help the Sox himself in 2006 more than any trade scenario. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ken Williams seems to be thinking otherwise, but we'll see how it plays out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 Garland for prospects? Hell no. Lets win another championship next year. done and done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank the Tank 35 Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 Unless we're getting Billingsley, we should concentrate on getting major league talent for Garland. The more I think about it, the more I'd like to see Billingsley though. With Liriano supposedly "Santana Jr." I'm getting pissed off just thinking about them coming in and shutting us out two games in a row. Not to mention, the Twins will have both of them locked up for years and years. Right now, the Sox have nobody that can pitch like Santana, and if they have a duplicate player of the same caliber, that wouldn't sit well with me. Billingsley at least has the potential to be as good as Santana unlike anybody we have now at any level. But as long as we keep winning, we COULD just buy an ace at some point, so getting to the playoffs again this year should be paramount to any personnel decision. The question is what's more important to a successful playoff run this year: a 6th starter that can come out of the minors or an upgraded bat, like Blalock, that could contribute on a daily basis? If the need for him ever arose, the 6th starter would become more valuable, but if that situation never materializes, the batter would be more valuable. ooo, decisions... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted December 18, 2005 Share Posted December 18, 2005 QUOTE(Frank the Tank 35 @ Dec 18, 2005 -> 06:31 PM) or an upgraded bat, like Blalock Personally, I wouldn't call Blalock much of an upgraded bat.. if at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KWs OK for Me Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 QUOTE(Felix @ Dec 18, 2005 -> 06:39 PM) Personally, I wouldn't call Blalock much of an upgraded bat.. if at all. Yes . . . we know . . . we've been over this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubba Philips Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 QUOTE(KWs OK for Me @ Dec 18, 2005 -> 07:18 PM) Yes . . . we know . . . we've been over this I was reading an article logjam in infield Ken Rosenthall. Might be Izturis odd man out in the infield. Imagine he's from venezuala a switch hitting, gold glover an the la Dodgers need pitching. Garland wants to go west. Garland for Izturis and maybe a few pitching prospects. He's recovering from season ending surgery by the famous dr. jobe. Gets caught as much as he steals and strike/bb about 2/1. Or every 10th ab. I wouldn't know how KW thinks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beck72 Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 QUOTE(forrestg @ Dec 19, 2005 -> 12:54 AM) I was reading an article logjam in infield Ken Rosenthall. Might be Izturis odd man out in the infield. Imagine he's from venezuala a switch hitting, gold glover an the la Dodgers need pitching. Garland wants to go west. Garland for Izturis and maybe a few pitching prospects. He's recovering from season ending surgery by the famous dr. jobe. Gets caught as much as he steals and strike/bb about 2/1. Or every 10th ab. I wouldn't know how KW thinks... Izturis would be an expensive UTL man, making $3.1 mill this yr and $4.15 in '07. The sox seem set with Mack and Ozuna for the IF. Better to just stick with the dodgers prospects Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubba Philips Posted December 19, 2005 Share Posted December 19, 2005 QUOTE(beck72 @ Dec 18, 2005 -> 07:58 PM) Izturis would be an expensive UTL man, making $3.1 mill this yr and $4.15 in '07. The sox seem set with Mack and Ozuna for the IF. Better to just stick with the dodgers prospects thanks, i didn't know about his contract. I do know about the Venezualan connection. you're right 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.