elrockinMT Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 Reported that as the Sox went on the road trip and playing interleague they thought about bringing up Miles. They decided to stay with 12 pitchers though. Question: Do we think that might have been the start of an infield shakeup or just simply adding another position player. I would have hated to see Miles just sitting on the old pine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clujer420 Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 Reported that as the Sox went on the road trip and playing interleague they thought about bringing up Miles. They decided to stay with 12 pitchers though. Question: Do we think that might have been the start of an infield shakeup or just simply adding another position player. I would have hated to see Miles just sitting on the old pine. Since Jimenez is still up around .290 or so, I HIGHLY doubt he'd be the one to get benched (if anyone). I'd say that if the Sox want to bring Miles up, they'd want to get him some PT -- otherwise it would be pointless. With Jose playing as poorly as he's been this year, maybe they'd consider benching him and his $5M+ salary? Who knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doubleM23 Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 Can we please just trade him to someone? How 'bout LA? Evans is dumb enough to take that kind of a deal. He traded for Todd Hundley, after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 Can we please just trade him to someone? How 'bout LA? Evans is dumb enough to take that kind of a deal. He traded for Todd Hundley, after all. And his top 2 prospects for Paul Shuey. Ugh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 And his top 2 prospects for Paul Shuey. Ugh. What is really sad is that he railroaded Kenny... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 What is really sad is that he railroaded Kenny... Dunno about that. Baldwin for Masaoka/Berry/Majewski would have been great if he held onto Masaoka. The guy had an awful spring training, but had a huge upside. But, the Berry/Barry thing was awful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 Dunno about that. Baldwin for Masaoka/Berry/Majewski would have been great if he held onto Masaoka. The guy had an awful spring training, but had a huge upside. But, the Berry/Barry thing was awful. Off the top of my head, didn't Baldwin have an ERA of like 6.00 in LA? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 And his top 2 prospects for Paul Shuey. Ugh. even worse, two really good ones for Tyler Houston. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clujer420 Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 Off the top of my head, didn't Baldwin have an ERA of like 6.00 in LA? 4.20 ERA with the Dodgers in 79 1/3 IP back in 2001. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshPR Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 Masaoka had a good Arm. Think his FastBall reached 99 MPH. If i'm not mistaken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerbaho-WG Posted June 6, 2003 Share Posted June 6, 2003 Masaoka had a good Arm. Think his FastBall reached 99 MPH. If i'm not mistaken No way, man. I could have sworn it topped out in the low to mid 90's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 even worse, two really good ones for Tyler Houston. And we got what for Ray Durham? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1549 Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Say what you want, but Evans is a good GM. I loved the Sheffield deal with the braves. I wish the Sox had Odalis Perez. I would take Evans over KW in a New York Minute Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SI1020 Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Say what you want, but Evans is a good GM. I loved the Sheffield deal with the braves. I wish the Sox had Odalis Perez. I would take Evans over KW in a New York Minute At this point I would take a potted plant over KW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Say what you want, but Evans is a good GM. I loved the Sheffield deal with the braves. I wish the Sox had Odalis Perez. I would take Evans over KW in a New York Minute Ditto. Criticize individual moves all you want, but Evans is a very solid GM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Ditto. Criticize individual moves all you want, but Evans is a very solid GM. Not in my mind Rex. I've seen him make numerous bad moves in LA. If he didn't have the payroll it would be a different story. Yes its not what the Dodgers once were (Free Spending) but he was able to give Nomo big money and even take on Omar Daal's salary last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Not in my mind Rex. I've seen him make numerous bad moves in LA. If he didn't have the payroll it would be a different story. Yes its not what the Dodgers once were (Free Spending) but he was able to give Nomo big money and even take on Omar Daal's salary last year. We'll agree to disagree then. I do hope you realize that 1. it is impossible for every move a GM makes to be a good one...... and 2. that sometimes there are reasons for moves that fans never know about. You can't grade every move on the surface. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 We'll agree to disagree then. I do hope you realize that 1. it is impossible for every move a GM makes to be a good one...... and 2. that sometimes there are reasons for moves that fans never know about. You can't grade every move on the surface. Oh I realize that. Lets remember, I am the same nut that has backed Ken Williams. The thing is, his trades for Shuey and Houston were beyond ridiculous. I won't complain as much about Shuey, although he gave up Rodriguez (Indians best starter in my mind) and another top prospect, but they gave up two really good prospects for Tyler Houston. He also had a not so good draft, although thats not really the gm's responsibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 We'll agree to disagree then. I do hope you realize that 1. it is impossible for every move a GM makes to be a good one...... and 2. that sometimes there are reasons for moves that fans never know about. You can't grade every move on the surface. Oh I realize that. Lets remember, I am the same nut that has backed Ken Williams. The thing is, his trades for Shuey and Houston were beyond ridiculous. I won't complain as much about Shuey, although he gave up Rodriguez (Indians best starter in my mind) and another top prospect, but they gave up two really good prospects for Tyler Houston. He also had a not so good draft, although thats not really the gm's responsibility. I don't know what was behind the Houston trade, but I know that Evans felt the responsibility to try and win last year, so he made the Shuey deal. If they make the playoffs, then that move is validated because it accomplished what is was supposed to. I'm pretty confident that he didn't go waving Rodriguez around asking for a bag of balls. He likely felt he had to make the move to try and win last year. Sometimes you trade guys you don't want to, because y ou feel it is yur only choice at the time. If he made no moves last year, the LA media would have crucified him. Does he wish he has Rodriguez back now? I haven't asked him, but my guess is hell yeah. But sometimes you can't look back. The Hundley deal was not as bad as people think. It was a case of trading two higly paid disgruntled players for one highly paid player hoping your guy can turn things around. If you take my problems and I'll take yours, kind of thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Thats where you have it wrong, Grudzelanek and Karros weren't disgruntled. These guys had great attitudes and played their hearts off for the Dodgers. They would of been more then happy to stay on the bench and have roles there. Heck, thats what Karros is doing right now. The trade was awful because Hundley is worthless, but it did save them money. Of course it also weakened their bench. Let me say this, Erric and Mark always worked their butt off down here in LA and I never ever heard them whine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Thats where you have it wrong, Grudzelanek and Karros weren't disgruntled. These guys had great attitudes and played their hearts off for the Dodgers. They would of been more then happy to stay on the bench and have roles there. Heck, thats what Karros is doing right now. The trade was awful because Hundley is worthless, but it did save them money. Of course it also weakened their bench. Let me say this, Erric and Mark always worked their butt off down here in LA and I never ever heard them whine. Everything I have ever heard said they both wanted out for one......... and two, they couldn't afford their salaries as bench players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Thats where you have it wrong, Grudzelanek and Karros weren't disgruntled. These guys had great attitudes and played their hearts off for the Dodgers. They would of been more then happy to stay on the bench and have roles there. Heck, thats what Karros is doing right now. The trade was awful because Hundley is worthless, but it did save them money. Of course it also weakened their bench. Let me say this, Erric and Mark always worked their butt off down here in LA and I never ever heard them whine. Everything I have ever heard said they both wanted out for one......... and two, they couldn't afford their salaries as bench players. I agree about the financial aspect of it and they wanted to move Grudzelanek so Thurson could play (Good prospect LA has). Of course salary wise the move will save them something like 2 million over the long haul. The thing is the Dodgers gave up a lot of offense as both mark and Erric when healthy are very solid offensive players. This is all in hindsight though, but I know I thought it was a very strange move at the time. I don't know if he could of done better, but I think he could of probably trade those two for someone more serviceable then Hundley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 Thats where you have it wrong, Grudzelanek and Karros weren't disgruntled. These guys had great attitudes and played their hearts off for the Dodgers. They would of been more then happy to stay on the bench and have roles there. Heck, thats what Karros is doing right now. The trade was awful because Hundley is worthless, but it did save them money. Of course it also weakened their bench. Let me say this, Erric and Mark always worked their butt off down here in LA and I never ever heard them whine. Everything I have ever heard said they both wanted out for one......... and two, they couldn't afford their salaries as bench players. I agree about the financial aspect of it and they wanted to move Grudzelanek so Thurson could play (Good prospect LA has). Of course salary wise the move will save them something like 2 million over the long haul. The thing is the Dodgers gave up a lot of offense as both mark and Erric when healthy are very solid offensive players. This is all in hindsight though, but I know I thought it was a very strange move at the time. I don't know if he could of done better, but I think he could of probably trade those two for someone more serviceable then Hundley. Perhaps so, but wasn't Hundley's success in LA? Somtimes you think a guy will suceed if you put him back into a situation where he has been comfortable and had success. A gamble yes, and it looks like not a good one at this point, but a lot goes into a trade and the reasons behind it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 I definately agree with you that most fans don't know near as much with what goes on in a trade. I think that Evans got really lucky with Perez, cause if he didn't get him, that would of been a laughing stock of a trade. Its not like Brian Jordan is cheap. Jordan is a solid player though. In regards to Hundley, yes he hit there, but this is Todd Hundley who became a clubhouse nuisance and remember, Evans wasn't there when Hundley hit so he wouldn't be familiar with him. I'd understand if the GM was there while Hundley played well and he knew a lot about him, but that wasn't the case. I'll give him some credit on Dave Roberts, but otherwise this team wasn't really built by him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Fainter Posted June 7, 2003 Share Posted June 7, 2003 I never understood why they traded Sheffield to begin with. 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.