fathom Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 06:02 PM) Nomar, kind of. True, but don't you think that was a unique situation? Good job though Rowand! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:57 PM) But you could rip off teams at the deadline. You usually only get best value in the offseason for prospects. If you have a legit Major leaguer, you're better off trying to trade him at the deadline because you would get a lot better prospects who probably aren't worth it in the deal. (E.G. Farnsworth to ATL deal, Villone to FLA deal). You also trade him at the deadline because you see you may have a glaring hole in the bullpen or somewhere else and you could always plug in McCarthy in the 5th slot. I agree with you for once. MLB players have more prospect-obtaining power at the trade deadline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(fathom @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:04 PM) True, but don't you think that was a unique situation? Good job though Rowand! Ya, I edited my response. He didn't contribute much at all in 04 but he was supposed to be their starting shortstop and I was actually at Fenway for his first game back and there was such a buzz there and he was going to help lead them to a title, yada yada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 BA's Top 10 Dodger 'Spects Here is the most current list I could find of top Dodger prospects. Anthrax, where is Delwyn? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:05 PM) Ya, I edited my response. He didn't contribute much at all in 04 but he was supposed to be their starting shortstop and I was actually at Fenway for his first game back and there was such a buzz there and he was going to help lead them to a title, yada yada. So you're willing to go to a Red Sox game at Fenway instead of spending that cash at U.S. Cellular Field?? Some type of White Sox fan you are. BANDWAGON JUMPER!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(3E8 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:04 PM) I agree with you for once. MLB players have more prospect-obtaining power at the trade deadline. In this case i most definitely think it is different. Any team that trades for him knows in advance he wants to test the market next off-season. I cannot see any team wanting half a season of a guy over a full especially if they were in need of major league pitching. Also, it is way to risky for the sox to wait until the dead line because garland is far from a lock to repeat his numbers of last year. His stock is at an all time high with the white sox as far as i am concerned. Edited December 21, 2005 by qwerty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 In this case i most definitely think it is different. Any team that trades for him knows in advance he wants to test the market next off-season. I cannot see any team wanting half a season of a guy over a full especially if they were in need of major league pitching. Also, it is way to risky for the sox to wait until the dead line because garland is far from a lock to repeat his numbers of last year. His stick is at an all time high with the white sox as far as i am concerned. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Great post. I agree 100%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:09 PM) In this case i most definitely think it is different. Any team that trades for him knows in advance he wants to test the market next off-season. I cannot see any team wanting half a season of a guy over a full especially if they were in need of major league pitching. Also, it is way to risky for the sox to wait until the dead line because garland is far from a lock to repeat his numbers of last year. His stock is at an all time high with the white sox as far as i am concerned. I disagree. I think any team that's in contention that needs a SP will go after him. Look at us and Freddy. Reed was considered a top prospect, Olivo a nice catcher, and Morse a throw-in. On paper at the time, it was a great deal for Seattle. Cubs did it with Nomar knowing he was a FA at the end of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:08 PM) So you're willing to go to a Red Sox game at Fenway instead of spending that cash at U.S. Cellular Field?? Some type of White Sox fan you are. BANDWAGON JUMPER!!! That's what I get for having relatives who live on the east coast. We were playing the Phillies that weekend where one of the games was rained out and another was an absolute shootout where Thome destroyed us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:13 PM) That's what I get for having relatives who live on the east coast. We were playing the Phillies that weekend where one of the games was rained out and another was an absolute shootout where Thome destroyed us. Force them to move to the Southside of Chicago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 I disagree. I think any team that's in contention that needs a SP will go after him. Look at us and Freddy. Reed was considered a top prospect, Olivo a nice catcher, and Morse a throw-in. On paper at the time, it was a great deal for Seattle. Cubs did it with Nomar knowing he was a FA at the end of the season. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> KW was willing to overpay (at the time it was considered overpaying) for Garcia because he knew he could lock him up to a contract extension with the Ozzie factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 01:09 PM) In this case i most definitely think it is different. Any team that trades for him knows in advance he wants to test the market next off-season. I cannot see any team wanting half a season of a guy over a full especially if they were in need of major league pitching. Also, it is way to risky for the sox to wait until the dead line because garland is far from a lock to repeat his numbers of last year. His stock is at an all time high with the white sox as far as i am concerned. There will be a team that starts the season with a below average 5th starter but a decent offense that has playoff hopes at the deadline. All they will need is one more arm for a strong playoff push. They wouldn't trade for Garland now, but they definitely would at the deadline. Like in '98 Houston trading Freddy Garcia and Carlos Guillen for Randy Johnson (look at his stats that year before he was traded). I think you are right about trading him at the deadline being too risky. We don't know which Garland we will get the first half of next season and the only suitors for him at the deadline may be direct competitors in the AL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 10:02 AM) I want Scott Elbert, Brazoban and a MI prospect. I still think this is more realistic. Maybe switch out Elbert for billings, but probably not. Remember, Garland is essentially a one year rental. Edited December 21, 2005 by RockRaines Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(3E8 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:23 PM) There will be a team that starts the season with a below average 5th starter but a decent offense that has playoff hopes at the deadline. All they will need is one more arm for a strong playoff push. They wouldn't trade for Garland now, but they definitely would at the deadline. Like in '98 Houston trading Freddy Garcia and Carlos Guillen for Randy Johnson (look at his stats that year before he was traded). I think you are right about trading him at the deadline being too risky. We don't know which Garland we will get the first half of next season and the only suitors for him at the deadline may be direct competitors in the AL. Well the whole risk thing is another aspect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(RockRaines @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 01:24 PM) I still think this is more realistic. Maybe switch out Elbert for billings, but probably not. Remember, Garland is essentially a one year rental. Garland would be required to sign a deal with LA before the trade would go through. Billingsley, Guzman and Brazoban or no deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(knightni @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:27 PM) Garland would be required to sign a deal with LA before the trade would go through. Billingsley, Guzman and Brazoban or no deal. Now you're asking for a king's ransom. I think they would give up any combination of those two players, but not all 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(nitetrain8601 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 01:12 PM) I disagree. I think any team that's in contention that needs a SP will go after him. Look at us and Freddy. Reed was considered a top prospect, Olivo a nice catcher, and Morse a throw-in. On paper at the time, it was a great deal for Seattle. Cubs did it with Nomar knowing he was a FA at the end of the season. The difference is that Freddy was having a hell of a year when we dealt for him. I agree with the other posters, there's a definite chance that Jon could go back to being his old self, which would seriously drop his value, and even if he keeps up his performance like last year, we'd probably be more inclined to keep him and just take the draft picks as opposed to dealing him to another contender. The only way we could possibly gain from keeping Jon until the deadline and dealing him is if some fringe contender gets desperate and tries to bolster their staff, like the Marlins getting Villone or the Mets getting Zambrano. There aren't a whole lot of teams with more than one of the type of prospect we want to acquire, and we clearly seem to be after two or more guys (seems like just the Dodgers and Rangers have the ammo, maybe the Angels for position players but they don't seem to want to deal them. I will admit that I'm not the greatest with prospects however). I seriously doubt that we would be able to get anything like the Mulder and Hudson deals if we wait until mid-season, while we might get something like that now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 (edited) Garland would be required to sign a deal with LA before the trade would go through. Billingsley, Guzman and Brazoban or no deal. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Give me Duaner Sanchez over Brazoban, unless of course Cooper is confident that he can turn Brazoban around. He does throw 97 MPH afterall. Edited December 21, 2005 by SSH2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 I'd rather have Brazoban, he tired a bit at the end of the year, given a consistent set up role, or spot relief, I think he could be lights out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Sox Josh Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 Why not try to trade Garland for something more then Prospects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(White Sox Josh @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:32 PM) Why not try to trade Garland for something more then Prospects. you are alive???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwerty Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(White Sox Josh @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 12:32 PM) Why not try to trade Garland for something more then Prospects. http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=44532 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(qwerty @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 02:35 PM) http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=44532 You beat me to it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 09:33 AM) I'm calling BS. If Arizona was able to get a five-tool, potential superstar in Chris Young for a pitcher who has been league average for the past two years, and who carries a big contract -- then we NEED to land either Billingsley or Guzman. If we don't get those two, it better be one helluva package that includes both Miller, Jackson, Broxton, and possibly another prospect. If given the choice between Billingsley and Guzman, I think I'd take Billingsley, just because we're going to need a cheap starter besides B-Mac in the next year or two. I'm also slightly worried about Guzman's 3/1 K/BB ratio (almost 130 K's); but that's me also doing a bit of nit-picking, as he was only 20 last year in AA. If a team doesn't want to give KW a knock-your-socks-off type deal right now, wait till the trade deadline. Because, I'm pretty sure Garland would be the TOP commodity at the deadline. Gosh, I'm so hoping for a Kazmir-for-Zambrano type, lopsided deal. Billingsley = STUD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greasywheels121 Posted December 21, 2005 Share Posted December 21, 2005 QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 01:36 PM) You beat me to it! 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.