Sox & Angels Talking; Crede/Garcia for Santana/Figgins

[iamshack]

I disagree, I believe he is the best. There is no doubt in my mind he should have won the GG this year in the AL, and watching him in person, he makes everything look very easy. If we deal him, you guys will see what it is like to be spoiled by a GG player at the hot corner.

 

I don't necessarily disagree with you. Hell, I would like to believe you are correct. But there are certainly some other guy who are fairly comparable with Joe defensively. Chavez, Blalock, Inge come to mind...

 

I still think if the sox somehow get Santana they'll move him in a package for Crawford. Was it Levine who mentioned the sox were in talks with the Drays?

 

He didn't necessarily say they were in "talks." Implied more so that Crawford was KW's number 1 offseason target.

[EvilJester99]

If the Sox got Santana and had to deal either him or BMac to get Crawford who would you rather see dealt?

[Rowand44]

If the Sox got Santana and had to deal either him or BMac to get Crawford who would you rather see dealt?

Neither, forget Crawford. Next question.

[WSFAN35]

Neither, forget Crawford. Next question.

 

at least someone has some common sense. why would the drays trade their best position player unless they are completely overwhelmed?

[Rowand44]

at least someone has some common sense. why would the drays trade their best position player unless they are completely overwhelmed?

Not why I answered it that way, if we get Santana then we should keep both imo. I'd be very unhappy if either were traded.

[Balta1701]

Not why I answered it that way, if we get Santana then we should keep both imo. I'd be very unhappy if either were traded.

Major agreement from this side as well. If you could put a pair of right arms like E. Santana and B. McCarthy out in your rotation for the next 5 years...it's hard to be in better shape than that.

 

The Twins could have really used some offensive help. Would it make sense for them to deal a Liriano or a J. Santana to get it?

[fathom]

I'd like to quickly add that if we go with Figgins in CF, Pods in LF, and Fields at 3B, we might as well reserve our 4th place finish in the division.

[Chisoxfn]

The more I think about it the more I make this deal even if we had to throw in someone and got nothing else in return. This deal just makes sense on so many levels.

 

1. Figgins - Gives Ozzie speed at the top of the order and a guy that can play CF. While he may not be the sexiest hitter ever alive, he still does a nice job getting xtra base hits and has surprising pop from time to time. More importantly he's a legit 50 base stealer year in year out. Plus he's signed to a very affordable deal.

 

2. Santana - Duh, we have an older rotation with a few guys due to become FA's (Buehrle/Garica). We give up Garcia and get younger but get a guy whose proven to be at least a #3 starter with the upside of being a #1 or #2 who we'd have the rights to for a lot longer (plus a lot less payroll). While Garcia may very well bounce back and be better than Santana next year, no one can tell me that the odds don't favor Earvin to be better for the next 4 years than Freddy (not to mention we probably wouldn't have Freddy those next 4 years). In addition this gives the Sox the money to sign Buehrle (if we want to) while also giving us a pretty well mixed rotation. Garland/Buehrle (if we sign him to an extension)/Santana/McCarthy are all on the right side of 30 with our lone older guy probably being 50 years old in Jose (who if healthy is still as good as anyone in the game).

 

3. We could get Donelly. While Donelly isn't what he once was, he still gives the Sox the final arm in the pen that they are looking for. Not only is he the final arm but he's a guy who has pitched in big time situations while being a setup man and even a closer on rare ocassions so in a worse case scenario (injuries, etc) we could use him in a crunch.

 

Above all, we would be able to keep Pods (I never thought I'd say this) and hit him in the 2nd spot with Figgins to give us arguably as fast a 1-2 in baseball (this side of LA). I realize I slam Pods a lot, but I think having Figgins with him would take a lot of pressure off Scott and with that I think he's still a 25-35 stolen base guy (at a better success rate when he's stealing a little less as well) which would give Ozzie all the speed he needs.

 

Iguchi drops down in the lineup replacing Crede in a sense, while Josh Fields steps in replacin Brian Anderson's rookie bat. We also have Anderson fill in as a 4th outfielder (or we could move him for a young arm) plus Sweeney/Mack who can roam around (mack filling in at 3rd from time to time).

 

I got to admit I'd really like it:

Figgy

Pods

Dye

Thome

Konerko

AJP

Iguchi

Fields

Uribe

 

I know its not quite as good of a lineup power wise (but we have tons of power anyway) but it definately is one capable of manufacturing runs. And if Pods struggles, we would have more than enough prospects to be able to acquire an outfielder at some point in time.

 

Rotation (obviously an additional trade could made and you could see that trade netting us a different left fielder or something else for all I know since we'd have 6 starters):

Buehrle

Count

Garland

Santana

Bmac

Vaz

 

(Broadway waits in wings)

 

Pen:

Jenks

MacDougall

Thorty

Logan

Donnelly

Aardsma

[Balta1701]

I'd like to quickly add that if we go with Figgins in CF, Pods in LF, and Fields at 3B, we might as well reserve our 4th place finish in the division.

And I'll retort that if we do that with a rotation of Contreras, Buehrle, Garland, Santana, and McCarthy, we might also consider measuring fingers. (oh, it'd be nice to get something for Vaz in the process by the way)

[Chisoxfn]

I'd like to quickly add that if we go with Figgins in CF, Pods in LF, and Fields at 3B, we might as well reserve our 4th place finish in the division.

Lol, just as I made my post thinking its actually a good idea. I'd still prefer Durham, but Pods will be very affordable and I could see him bouncing back a bit. Plus with the pressure to be the only speed guy off his back I could see him doing a bit better (both defensively and on the base paths).

 

I should also note that one of my main goals this off-season is to provide Ozzie with speed at the top of the order because I Think having that will prevent him from doing something ungodly stupid with our slower guys. Plus I think having a little speed will ensure Ozzie doesn't get super comfortable cause last year I think he was afraid to make changes because he really didn't know what to do and when he did they were just awful. With some speed he'll feel more involved and our team will fit his style of play a bit more (which I don't think is a bad thing, as long as we continue to stock our rotation).

 

I fully think a team with those guys is capable of a world series run, especially knowing that if any of those guys play sub-par Williams would have the financial resources (and prospects) to replace them with a quality player via trade.

[fathom]

The more I think about it the more I make this deal even if we had to throw in someone and got nothing else in return. This deal just makes sense on so many levels.

 

This would mean that our defense is worse than last year, and any offensive upgrade made from Anderson to Figgins is negated big time by going from Crede to Josh Fields.

[Chisoxfn]

This would mean that our defense is worse than last year, and any offensive upgrade made from Anderson to Figgins is negated big time by going from Crede to Josh Fields.

But you see I don't think its that much of a difference. More specifically I think people undervalue Figgins who is a far better player than he was last year. Heck, even Pods (as much as I hate him) is a better player than he was last year. I'm not a big Fields fan, but we'd also have Mack's production and obviously there is no guarantee we get the same production out of Joe.

 

Defensively we definately lose at 3rd, gain in CF (Figgins is better than the two headed monster we saw last year) and probably gain a bit in LF (just cause I think with a bit less pressure he won't play quite as brutal and will instead be the 3rd or 4th worse left fielder in all of baseball, LOL).

[fathom]

But you see I don't think its that much of a difference. More specifically I think people undervalue Figgins who is a far better player than he was last year. Heck, even Pods (as much as I hate him) is a better player than he was last year. I'm not a big Fields fan, but we'd also have Mack's production and obviously there is no guarantee we get the same production out of Joe.

 

Defensively we definately lose at 3rd, gain in CF (Figgins is better than the two headed monster we saw last year) and probably gain a bit in LF (just cause I think with a bit less pressure he won't play quite as brutal and will instead be the 3rd or 4th worse left fielder in all of baseball, LOL).

 

I know I said this earlier in this thread, but I hate the fact that Chone sucks against LHP.

[Chisoxfn]

Like it, and I'm sure the Knights are going to LOVE having Vazquez start for them.

 

I agree with pretty much everything you said, and I would like to add a little bit

 

-Because your trading starter for starter, you still are able to deal ANOTHER starter. Garcia is gone, but with Ervin on the roster, Garland/Count/Vaz/Mark can still be shipped for whatever you need. Santana>Garcia(numbers and $$$ wise) and you can STILL do what you want to do by trading another starter for prospects, or whatever.

 

Like you said, it just makes too much sense.

Ya, I meant to add a portion in there on Vaz or one of our other starters getting dealt. I'd say Buehrle, but obviously he's our only lefty and a leader and of course you have Count and his no trade clause (who is actually who I'd prefer to deal because I think he has injury concerns).

 

But ya, we could still acquire a guy like Pelfrey for Vaz or fill some other need Kenny has identified (whether its LF/CF, depending on whether Figgins plays) or even getting us a top notch 3rd baseman. I really like it cause it keeps the team relatively similar while at the same time making a bit of a shakeup that will make us a bit better now and a lot better later (which is something Ken Williams has stated are mandatory for any deal he makes).

[Balta1701]

3. We could get Donelly. While Donelly isn't what he once was, he still gives the Sox the final arm in the pen that they are looking for. Not only is he the final arm but he's a guy who has pitched in big time situations while being a setup man and even a closer on rare ocassions so in a worse case scenario (injuries, etc) we c

I for one agree that this sort of deal makes a ton of sense, but personally, I think a better option than Donnely is to look at one of the former prospects the Angels have soured on, specifically Dallas McPherson. He is at least a 3rd baseman by trade, he's a lefty batter (which means if necessary he could platoon with Fields), he has a little more ML experience, he's not going to be playing anywhere for the Angels this year as far as I can tell, and he does still have a high ceiling if he can ever stay healthy.

 

Furthermore, I for one am still happy sticking with the knuckleballer out of the bullpen as the 4th righty and 6th guy out. As we all know, Ozzie hardly ever uses his bullpen, so it's going to be difficult for Haegs to be exposed anyway, but I think we wind up better off with this setup than the other way. Haeger gave me some confidence that he could perform out of the bullpen as a long-man by doing exactly that in September, and I would like to see him at least be slotted into that role next year. If he fails...well, that's why he's the 6th guy out.

 

And I for one also would vastly prefer an outfield of Figgins/Anderson/Dye to one of Podsednik/Figgins/Dye. Defensively the former is much, much better, it's several million dollars cheaper, and it has a much higher ceiling.

[fathom]

The only way I'm a fan of this deal is if we then turn around and trade McCarthy in a package for Carl Crawford.

[Balta1701]

The only way I'm a fan of this deal is if we then turn around and trade McCarthy in a package for Carl Crawford.

I still say that no matter how good of a player an outfielder is, young pitching is just too valuable to sacrifice in a deal like that. And that is only magnified when you throw in what the D-Rays would actually ask for Crawford.

Edited November 30, 2006 by Balta1701

[fathom]

I still say that no matter how good of a player an outfielder is, young pitching is just too valuable to sacrifice in a deal like that. And that is only magnified when you throw in what the D-Rays would actually ask for Crawford.

 

I agree about the young pitching, but Crawford is a budding superstar with a good contract. We're not talking about someone like Vernon Wells. You know I wanted McCarthy in the rotation all year last season, but for the right package, I'd have no problem with the Sox trading him. His value will never be higher than it is after this season....he'll either be a focal point of our team for the next 5 years, or he'll be a disappointment.

 

Whats the downside of having both Santana and Mac in the rotation??

 

If we do that, we better trade one of our other starters for some MLB ready offensive players.

[Chisoxfn]

I for one agree that this sort of deal makes a ton of sense, but personally, I think a better option than Donnely is to look at one of the former prospects the Angels have soured on, specifically Dallas McPherson. He is at least a 3rd baseman by trade, he's a lefty batter (which means if necessary he could platoon with Fields), he has a little more ML experience, he's not going to be playing anywhere for the Angels this year as far as I can tell, and he does still have a high ceiling if he can ever stay healthy.

 

Furthermore, I for one am still happy sticking with the knuckleballer out of the bullpen as the 4th righty and 6th guy out. As we all know, Ozzie hardly ever uses his bullpen, so it's going to be difficult for Haegs to be exposed anyway, but I think we wind up better off with this setup than the other way. Haeger gave me some confidence that he could perform out of the bullpen as a long-man by doing exactly that in September, and I would like to see him at least be slotted into that role next year. If he fails...well, that's why he's the 6th guy out.

 

And I for one also would vastly prefer an outfield of Figgins/Anderson/Dye to one of Podsednik/Figgins/Dye. Defensively the former is much, much better, it's several million dollars cheaper, and it has a much higher ceiling.

With MacDougall as one of our key relievers, we need to be extra careful that we have depth because its just a matter of time before he goes down and someone else gets a bigger role. Don't get me wrong, I love McPherson, he's a superior prospect to that of Fields (he's just not healthy) and that would be a sick platoon (especially because from time to time you could probably trot Fields out in left, although that may not be great for his development defensively but it would give him AB's).

 

However, I don't know if the Angels give up McPherson without getting a pretty darn good prospect from us (not that I'm opposed to it). I'm probably the only one here that would include Broadway or Anderson in the deal even if we got nothing else in return (because I think it makes that much sense in the long run). I'd hate to give up Broadway (nor do I think it will take that) but if that ended up being what it took to get the deal done (with us getting McPherson or Donnelly or some other arm we like) than so be it.

 

The downside is that Mac isn't that good and his trade value gets killed. If I made that Crawford deal it would be contingent on what else the Rays want. It would probably be too much, but if it were a straight up deal (and I'd be shocked if it was) I would do it. The rotation will be strong anyway (Vaz/Buehrle/Garland/Santana/Count) with a prospect as plan B.

 

The deal would also be contingent upon my discussions with Ozzie and his feelings about Brandon. IF he likes Brandon and is willing to use him as a starter fine, but if he's not (and Ozzie's not going anywhere) than I'd be more likely to deal him.

 

I'd personally prefer moving one of our other starters and sticking with Brandon (cause I think we'd get a top flight starting pitching prospect and than some for one of our other starters...plus all the financial flexibility to start resigning a couple key guys, such as Buehrle if he starts the season strong).

[Melissa1334]

i got to admit I'd really like it:

Figgy

Pods

Dye

Thome

Konerko

AJP

Iguchi

Fields

Uribe

 

I know its not quite as good of a lineup power wise (but we have tons of power anyway) but it definately is one capable of manufacturing runs. And if Pods struggles, we would have more than enough prospects to be able to acquire an outfielder at some point in time.

 

Rotation (obviously an additional trade could made and you could see that trade netting us a different left fielder or something else for all I know since we'd have 6 starters):

Buehrle

Count

Garland

Santana

Bmac

Vaz

 

(Broadway waits in wings)

 

Pen:

Jenks

MacDougall

Thorty

Logan

Donnelly

Aardsma

i like it too...but im not too sure about logan, there are a lot of good bats in the al central, among the best in baseball, (mauer, morneau,hafner, sizemore)we need a reliable lefty, besides thornton.

Edited November 30, 2006 by Melissa1334

[RockRaines]

Good young pitching may be > to good young hitting

 

But Crawford>BMAC every day of the week.

[Chisoxfn]

Balta, I think that could change this year. I think that for a few reasons.

 

1. Mark/Count/Vaz/Jon all have logged a TON of innings, and I think we saw some of the effects down the stretch last season.

 

2.Brandon in the rotation. We all know that he really got jacked around last season, and it could hurt us this season. Ain't a chance he pitches 200 innings this year, at least not a chance he doesnt get hurt. His body just isn't used to that yet. Ozzie and Kenny know this, so I think your going to see the pen more this year,as we should.

 

3. The importance Ozzie and Kenny have put on the bullpen this off-season. Whenever asked about this off-season, that seems to be one of the 1st things to come up. Ozzie has made some awful moves, but I really do believe he has learned alot, especially in 2006, and you will see a little change in philosophy with the staff this year.

Plus while Ozzie may not use his relievers a lot, he's the type of manager that tends to put all of his relievers into key situations so that final guys isn't just going to get mop up duties, he's more than likely to see action with the bases loaded in the 6th inning of a game.

[TheBigHurt]

Figgins playing CF?

[shawnhillegas]

the interesting thing about Crawford is that I just dont think that are a whole lot of teams really pursuing him right now. Teams like the Angels need power bats, not another speedster, and the Red Sox either a) dont have room or B) need a productive power hitter to replace Manny and protect Ortiz (JD Drew will not do.) The Yankees have an outfield, the Dodges have Pierre.....I'm sure there are plenty of teams willing to make an offer, but the need this offseason seems to be for power bats, not Crawford types. All this just makes me think that a deal for Crawford is a moderate possibility.

 

 

I have no idea how that stupid smiley thing got in there

Edited November 30, 2006 by shawnhillegas

[Balta1701]

Good young pitching may be > to good young hitting

 

But Crawford>BMAC every day of the week.

I'm not so sure about that personally, but I will say that BMac+Fields+Sweeney, if Tampa is even willing to take that for him (they may still not bite at that, they want a fortune), is to my eyes a lot more valuable than just Crawford.