Flash Tizzle Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(BearSox @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 07:03 PM) If we could get a good/potential filled bullpen arm out of the Marlins like Renyal Pinto or Petit out of Anderson I'd probably do the trade, if we got Rowand from a package like Tracey and Rogo. I would hope Williams thinks more of Anderson than a bullpen arm. We have quite enough of those as it is. We're missing top of the rotation talent. Unless Anderson is commanding that from Florida, he shouldn't be traded there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 14, 2007 -> 12:07 PM) I would hope Williams thinks more of Anderson than a bullpen arm. We have quite enough of those as it is. We're missing top of the rotation talent. Unless Anderson is commanding that from Florida, he shouldn't be traded there. Ah-ha. We're talking prospects like Chris Volstad here. Obviously in all of this, there's something ongoing behind the scenes with BA here, and the veterans may want Rowand back possibly, along with Ozzie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 08:07 PM) I would hope Williams thinks more of Anderson than a bullpen arm. We have quite enough of those as it is. We're missing top of the rotation talent. Unless Anderson is commanding that from Florida, he shouldn't be traded there. ???????? John Danks and Gio Gonzalez, at least last time I checked, were considered top of the rotation talent. And there a couple more guys lower that have some good potential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(DBAH0 @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 08:19 PM) Ah-ha. We're talking prospects like Chris Volstad here. I'd prefer Sean West. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Also, the best we could possibly do for Anderson is Tyler Tankersly, IMO. We are not going to get Volstad or Sinkibeli for Anderson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 There's maybe 5 ace talents in baseball. The best you can hope for from Danks and Gio are #2-#4 talents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 08:38 PM) There's maybe 5 ace talents in baseball. The best you can hope for from Danks and Gio are #2-#4 talents. So. You expect to get one of those "5 ace potential" pitchers for Anderson? Right now there might only be 5 considered like Homer Bailey, but anyone can become an ace. Look at Buehrle... was he considered Ace potential 10 years ago? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(Tony82087 @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 08:43 PM) No he wasn't, and I don't think he is now... well, he was for a good portion of his career so far, at least Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Mark was for a couple of years, but that's opening a different can of worms. Why trade BA when we can't get s*** for him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 08:47 PM) Mark was for a couple of years, but that's opening a different can of worms. I'm with Cheat when he said a couple years back that Buehrle wasn't an "Ace." All in all, your right though. I'm not gonna stur the pot now.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 08:47 PM) Mark was for a couple of years, but that's opening a different can of worms. Why trade BA when we can't get s*** for him? We could probably get a good arm or two out of him... but you are saying only trade him for ace potential is just unrealistic. If we get Rowand and we could get a Tankersly, Petit, or another good pitcher for Anderson, I wouldn't be opposed to it. Does that mean I want Anderson gone if we do get Rowand? Heavens no. Anderson can provide good insurrance, can be involved in a package of a bigger trade, or if Rowand and Erstad don't work out, we'd have Anderson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rowandrules83 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(witesoxfan @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 05:00 PM) so because the Sox did well when he was the CFer, he's good? That's the worst argument in the world. He was a passable CFer because he was mediocre offensively and good defensively. And he was not really all that good in Philly last year either, what with his .262 average and a .745 OPS in one of the best hitters parks in the NL, and to top it off, he was injured as well because of his own doing (his "grinderness," if you will). He's a good 4th OFer who just so happens to be the best option in CF for the two teams he was on in the past two years. That's no longer the case in either place, hence why the Phillies are looking to move him and his $4+ million salary The fact of the matter is Erstad would almost undoubtedly put up better numbers if he were to stay healthy, and Anderson would very likely be a better option as well. The Phillies aren't willing to just give him away, but they are and have been shopping him for quite some time, and for good reason - because Aaron Rowand is a glorified 4th OFer. /intentionally ignores screen name "Glorified 4th outfielder": Very original quote, I think you just plagiarized Mariotti. My point is if the guy is starting arguably the most important outfield position out there for two very good teams, how can he be a 4th outfielder? If he "just so happens to be the best option in CF", then wouldn't that automatically make him better than a 4th outfielder. I never claimed that Rowand is Willie Mays with a goatee, all I stated was that he's not as bad as you, as well as other posters, are making him out to be. The fact that you have to criticize him for basically sacrificing his body for the good of the team is a stretch. If BA backed off on a play because he didn't want to sacrifice his body,and that ends up costing the sox a game many of us would kill him on this board. BTW, the screen name is 3 years old, you apparently also intentionally ignored the date Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(BearSox @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 07:51 PM) We could probably get a good arm or two out of him... but you are saying only trade him for ace potential is just unrealistic. If we get Rowand and we could get a Tankersly, Petit, or another good pitcher for Anderson, I wouldn't be opposed to it. Does that mean I want Anderson gone if we do get Rowand? Heavens no. Anderson can provide good insurrance, can be involved in a package of a bigger trade, or if Rowand and Erstad don't work out, we'd have Anderson. Unrealistic, yes, but those should be the conditions. What good are more #5 starters or bullpen arms within this organization? Either Florida provides their top pitching talent for Anderson or they don't get him. I don't feel trading him, and taking our chances with Rowand, is worth marginal talent. Especially with the possibility Williams looks ridiculous if Anderson actually develops into something. It has to be worthwhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 07:04 PM) Unrealistic, yes, but those should be the conditions. What good are more #5 starters or bullpen arms within this organization? Either Florida provides their top pitching talent for Anderson or they don't get him. I don't feel trading him, and taking our chances with Rowand, is worth marginal talent. Especially with the possibility Williams looks ridiculous if Anderson actually develops into something. It has to be worthwhile. Does anyone other than me realize that the whole reason some other team might want Anderson right now is that they're hoping to get a potential gold-glove CF who can develop into a good hitter and who costs them the MLB minimum for the next several years at a bare-minimum price because of Anderson's poor last season? You guys remember how the Yankees had Contreras for like 2 years, then traded him for Loaiza? The Yankees made 2 mistakes, they traded for Loaiza before his value went completely through the floor, and they traded Contreras without giving him any realistic chance to hit his ceiling. The White Sox got some nice shiny rings out of that. If Anderson fails, Anderson fails. But he should fail as a part of our team...because right now, its absolutely impossible for us to get value in a trade back equal to what it should be given his talent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 09:47 PM) Mark was for a couple of years, but that's opening a different can of worms. Yeah, but those were some damn fun worms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 10:14 PM) Yeah, but those were some damn fun worms. They were, weren't they. Big, juicy ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greasywheels121 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heads22 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Can't see it, Mr. Wheels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 maybe it's worms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greasywheels121 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Right click, view image, or go here.. http://bp0.blogger.com/_W6YuhWU3sm8/RfYlOC...PH7-3-12-07.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(greasywheels121 @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 11:27 PM) Right click, view image, or go here.. http://bp0.blogger.com/_W6YuhWU3sm8/RfYlOC...PH7-3-12-07.jpg Well, you knew this was coming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max power Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 I don't get it. "worms" ???!!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(Heads22 @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 11:21 PM) They were, weren't they. Big, juicy ones. They caught the best fish. I love, love, love sucker fish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 QUOTE(max power @ Mar 13, 2007 -> 10:46 PM) I don't get it. "worms" ???!!? Mark Buehrle is not an ace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max power Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 What does that have to do with worms? *not following this* 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.