Adrian Gonzalez

[Balta1701]

Why would he want to go to Boston? His oppo HRs would turn into doubles.

But a lot of those 7 doubles off of or close to the RF wall in Petco would be departing.

[chisoxfan09]

But a lot of those 7 doubles off of or close to the RF wall in Petco would be departing.

 

Wouldn´t it stand to reason he would actually increase his HR production at the Cell even slightly, especially to Right Field?

[Balta1701]

Wouldn´t it stand to reason he would actually increase his HR production at the Cell even slightly, especially to Right Field?

He hit 40 home runs last year, only 12 at home. There were at least 7 warning track doubles in Petco last year he hit, some of which would be likely to depart another ballpark. But you never know of course; a guy can also wind up changing his hitting style and hurting his production as well.

[southsider2k5]

Why would he want to go to Boston? His oppo HRs would turn into doubles.

 

Winning World Series's sucks.

[Balta1701]

Winning World Series's sucks.

As does making $20 mil/year. Just ask Michael Steele. (Can I make that joke here?)

[ThunderBolt]

Is this renewed "we're gonna trade from Agon" talk coming from any news or just the burning desire to feel like our administration does care about not losing.

THAT'S A BINGO!

[Real]

THAT'S A BINGO!

 

"We just say bingo"

[chisoxfan09]

"We just say bingo"

 

BINGO!!!

[chisoxt]

Today on White Sox weekly, Mike Gonzalez mentioned that A-Gon will likely be dealt, its only a matter of time. The team with the best chance to get him are the Red Sox. Jed Hoyer was the former Assistant GM for the Red Sox and has a great relationship w/ Epstien. With the Red Sox deep farm- and Hoyer's knowledge of all of those prospects, it would be really hard to match up with them.

Not to hijack the thread, but isn't it curious that with all those years of winning, the Red Sox have a better farm system than ours. I guess we can't use the excuse that we don't get enough top draft picks.

[Quin]

Not to hijack the thread, but isn't it curious that with all those years of winning, the Red Sox have a better farm system than ours. I guess we can't use the excuse that we don't get enough top draft picks.

 

Duane Shaffer really sucked.

 

Just look at the past 3 #1's compared to Shaffers.

 

Shaffers:

 

Ruffcorn, Pearson, Christman, Johnson, Liefer, Seay, Dellaero, Wells, Stumm, Ginter, Borchard, Ring, Anderson, Fields, Broadway, McCulloch.

 

Brian Anderson is the most productive of all those picks. Then Fields.

 

Post Shaffer: Poreda, Beckham, Mitchell

 

There's 3 guys that all project to be worlds better than the monstrosity of our 1991-2006 drafts.

[Dick Allen]

Duane Shaffer really sucked.

 

Just look at the past 3 #1's compared to Shaffers.

 

Shaffers:

 

Ruffcorn, Pearson, Christman, Johnson, Liefer, Seay, Dellaero, Wells, Stumm, Ginter, Borchard, Ring, Anderson, Fields, Broadway, McCulloch.

 

Brian Anderson is the most productive of all those picks. Then Fields.

 

Post Shaffer: Poreda, Beckham, Mitchell

 

There's 3 guys that all project to be worlds better than the monstrosity of our 1991-2006 drafts.

Borchard was thought of a lot more highly than Poreda and Mitchell, and the White Sox gave him more than double the bonus they gave Beckham, so while he didn't amount to much at least Poreda and Mitchell have a long way to go in order to prove they were worthy of their bonuses. The Sox can blame Shaffer all they want, but if its all on him, how was he allowed to continue as long as he did?

 

And what about the Dave Wilder fiasco? What was the deal with that? He was actually given promotions. What were they based on? Certainly not performance.

Edited February 7, 2010 by Dick Allen

[Mattchoo]

Trading Alexei or Floyd to be able to hold on to Hudson is not a way to build. Both are a lot more essential to the core of the Sox.

 

I agree with what you are saying, but I didn't state my point clearly after rereading it today. I feel that we need to add more value to some of the packages we are proposing the last 4-5 pages. I think we should hang on to Hudson and include Floyd for two reasons. 1) It would make our offering a heck of a lot more enticing, and 2) we could hold onto one of our top three prospects, and it would be the pitcher since we would be sending Floyd in the deal. Also in my Floyd, Flowers, Mitchell, Morel, and a prospect for Gonzalez and Young, we are helping out the Padres pocket books while giving them a better SP

 

 

 

 

Everyone always says the Red Sox are the favorites because of the past working relationship they had and that Padres GM knows the Boston prospects. But I challenge anyone to consider that the Padres GM knows those players so well that he feels they are overrated. I can't stand "ratings" most of the time because it is generally just opinion based on judgment and use of statistical progressions. After all, some moron ranked the Sox prospects as DEAD LAST in all of MLB. Yet, didn't our entire farm system have one of the better W-L records last year? Also, we have players that are performing. Anyway, my whole point for this paragraph of my post is that the Sox prospects are more likely not as "low" in value as the general population (posters from all teams) think.

[chisoxfan09]

I agree with what you are saying, but I didn't state my point clearly after rereading it today. I feel that we need to add more value to some of the packages we are proposing the last 4-5 pages. I think we should hang on to Hudson and include Floyd for two reasons. 1) It would make our offering a heck of a lot more enticing, and 2) we could hold onto one of our top three prospects, and it would be the pitcher since we would be sending Floyd in the deal. Also in my Floyd, Flowers, Mitchell, Morel, and a prospect for Gonzalez and Young, we are helping out the Padres pocket books while giving them a better SP

 

 

 

 

Everyone always says the Red Sox are the favorites because of the past working relationship they had and that Padres GM knows the Boston prospects. But I challenge anyone to consider that the Padres GM knows those players so well that he feels they are overrated. I can't stand "ratings" most of the time because it is generally just opinion based on judgment and use of statistical progressions. After all, some moron ranked the Sox prospects as DEAD LAST in all of MLB. Yet, didn't our entire farm system have one of the better W-L records last year? Also, we have players that are performing. Anyway, my whole point for this paragraph of my post is that the Sox prospects are more likely not as "low" in value as the general population (posters from all teams) think.

 

Matchoo I think at least some of the value in the prospects we have considered lies in the fact that they are all going to be controlled at MLB minimum salaries for at least their 3 Pre-Arbitration years. That is why I concentrate on listing those types of prospects in most of my posts. Since the Pads are obviously in rebuilding mode and won´t be able to bring their payroll up to a minimum where they can lure free agents then they have to concentrate on building via the farm, whether it is home grown or acquired via trade. I have some hope since I have posted efore that both their former GM Kevin Towers and now their new owner kinda both say (Towers more) that it is a question of time before they trade AGon.

But time will tell.

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

Duane Shaffer really sucked.

 

Just look at the past 3 #1's compared to Shaffers.

 

Shaffers:

 

Ruffcorn, Pearson, Christman, Johnson, Liefer, Seay, Dellaero, Wells, Stumm, Ginter, Borchard, Ring, Anderson, Fields, Broadway, McCulloch.

 

Brian Anderson is the most productive of all those picks. Then Fields.

 

Post Shaffer: Poreda, Beckham, Mitchell

 

There's 3 guys that all project to be worlds better than the monstrosity of our 1991-2006 drafts.

That's hell of a lot of talent you mentioned while s***ting on the job Schaffer did. The Sox have had poor results, but this "project to be better" stuff is nonsense. Anybody can project anything, doesn't mean it's going to happen.

 

Borchard alone was at one point rated far higher than Mitchell will likely ever be rated because Borchard's ceiling was far higher than that of Mitchell. Mitchell is garnering Crawford comparisons all over the place and now he's so special? You'd laugh if you knew who it was Borchard was being compared to when he was drafted. Mitchell is a very nice prospect, but he's raw and he's far away, and if you go back in time without the benefit of foresight, every single person on this board would have taken Borchard over Mitchell. I also hated the Poreda pick, and the only reason it looks good now is because we used it to get Peavy. Only a few off that list of players you mentioned had arguably lower ceilings than Poreda given how much Poreda had to add to his game and the likeliness of that. He was always closer to setup man/possible future closer than the future #1 starter some talked him up as. Beckham IIRC is also the highest Sox draft pick since Harold Baines. So your point on Schaffer holds no water, and if anything, the worst part of Schaffer's tenure came during the "safe picks" era which was under Kenny's watch and under Kenny's control, and all these bad first round draft picks Kenny had allowed to happen.

 

Beckham looking as awesome combined with Hudson actually looking like a very good homegrown starter for the first time in forever is making people overrate the s*** out of our current prospects and underrate the s*** out of our of past prospects. We've had lots of guys come through our system with high ceilings and with the ability to do some pretty nice things at the MLB level one day, but the vast majority of these guys don't end up doing anything worthwhile. We do have some very good prospects, but 5-10 years from now we'll probably look back on the 2010 farm system as mostly a bunch of crap, some of which we were fortunate enough to trade for good players.

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

I agree with what you are saying, but I didn't state my point clearly after rereading it today. I feel that we need to add more value to some of the packages we are proposing the last 4-5 pages. I think we should hang on to Hudson and include Floyd for two reasons. 1) It would make our offering a heck of a lot more enticing, and 2) we could hold onto one of our top three prospects, and it would be the pitcher since we would be sending Floyd in the deal. Also in my Floyd, Flowers, Mitchell, Morel, and a prospect for Gonzalez and Young, we are helping out the Padres pocket books while giving them a better SP

 

 

 

 

Everyone always says the Red Sox are the favorites because of the past working relationship they had and that Padres GM knows the Boston prospects. But I challenge anyone to consider that the Padres GM knows those players so well that he feels they are overrated. I can't stand "ratings" most of the time because it is generally just opinion based on judgment and use of statistical progressions. After all, some moron ranked the Sox prospects as DEAD LAST in all of MLB. Yet, didn't our entire farm system have one of the better W-L records last year? Also, we have players that are performing. Anyway, my whole point for this paragraph of my post is that the Sox prospects are more likely not as "low" in value as the general population (posters from all teams) think.

The problem with dealing Floyd is that he's cheap now and he's proven himself. If you deal proven players to hold onto unproven players then that's not a win-now mentality. Yes, the offer would be more enticing to the Padres, but now we've just weakened our greatest strength, so while we might be a bit better going from Floyd + Konerko at 1B + Jones/Kotsay at DH to Hudson + Gonzalez at 1B + Konerko at DH, the amount of talent we'd have to give up to make us that little bit better probably hurts us in the long run. If you take all that talent and offer it to someone else while keeping Floyd, you might not be able to get Gonzalez, but you'd be able to get a damn fine player or two that when added to the picture could make us better than we'd be with Hudson + Gonzalez.

 

IMO, the Padres can have anyone in the organization not named Buehre, Peavy, Danks, Floyd, Beckham, or Quentin.

Edited February 7, 2010 by Kenny Hates Prospects

[Ranger]

The problem with dealing Floyd is that he's cheap now and he's proven himself. If you deal proven players to hold onto unproven players then that's not a win-now mentality. Yes, the offer would be more enticing to the Padres, but now we've just weakened our greatest strength, so while we might be a bit better going from Floyd + Konerko at 1B + Jones/Kotsay at DH to Hudson + Gonzalez at 1B + Konerko at DH, the amount of talent we'd have to give up to make us that little bit better probably hurts us in the long run. If you take all that talent and offer it to someone else while keeping Floyd, you might not be able to get Gonzalez, but you'd be able to get a damn fine player or two that when added to the picture could make us better than we'd be with Hudson + Gonzalez.

 

IMO, the Padres can have anyone in the organization not named Buehre, Peavy, Danks, Floyd, Beckham, or Quentin.

 

 

Do you mean both Danks, or just John?

[GreatScott82]

Do you mean both Danks, or just John?

Im assuming he meant just John.

[3E8]

Yeah, not too many would consider Jordan Danks a hold-up in dealing for Adrian Gonzalez

[Balta1701]

Yeah, not too many would consider Jordan Danks a hold-up in dealing for Adrian Gonzalez

The big problem with D2 is that D1 still made a sacrifice, switching agents away from Boras, when we drafted D2. Thus, trading D2 could easily have a huge impact on the ability of the team to hold onto D1. And we still have no idea what they might have said behind the scenes as well.

[Dick Allen]

The big problem with D2 is that D1 still made a sacrifice, switching agents away from Boras, when we drafted D2. Thus, trading D2 could easily have a huge impact on the ability of the team to hold onto D1. And we still have no idea what they might have said behind the scenes as well.

 

I think that is BS. If Jordan Danks being a White Sox was that important, why didn't the Sox select him in an earlier round? Also, if trading away Jordan Danks and getting Adrian Gonzalez back pisses John Danks off so much he wouldn't re-sign, he obviously would not have his priorities in order. I don't buy there being any hesitation trading Jordan because John may not like it. If it improves the team, John should love it, and his younger brother still gets an opportunity. Maybe even a better one.

[3E8]

We've done a lot for the Danks family and John's development especially. If he didn't work with our staff he might not have developed the cutter which has enabled him a lot of success and future value in the MLB. The type of value and earning potential a cutthroat agent cannot add. Jordan was given a very generous signing bonus as well. I wouldn't let these kind of emotions get in the way of an Adrian Gonzalez deal

[GreatScott82]

We've done a lot for the Danks family and John's development especially. If he didn't work with our staff he might not have developed the cutter which has enabled him a lot of success and future value in the MLB. The type of value and earning potential a cutthroat agent cannot add. Jordan was given a very generous signing bonus as well. I wouldn't let these kind of emotions get in the way of an Adrian Gonzalez deal

well said. however, i highly doubt- jordan danks would be the center piece to an A-Gon deal anyway. Mitchell has a much higher ceiling than D2 and you would have to assume- he would have to be included in a mega package headed to San Diego.

[newportitis]

well said. however, i highly doubt- jordan danks would be the center piece to an A-Gon deal anyway. Mitchell has a much higher ceiling than D2 and you would have to assume- he would have to be included in a mega package headed to San Diego.

Pretty sure the Sox can't trade Jared Mitchell. Teams have to wait one year before draft choices are eligible to be traded.

[Balta1701]

Pretty sure the Sox can't trade Jared Mitchell. Teams have to wait one year before draft choices are eligible to be traded.

A player can be placed on a PTBNL list for up to 6 months. The Sox could have traded Mitchell by putting his name on a PTBNL list since late December.

[chisoxfan09]

A player can be placed on a PTBNL list for up to 6 months. The Sox could have traded Mitchell by putting his name on a PTBNL list since late December.

 

This is the part of the whole discussion I am not sure on if it ever gets this far. Do the Pads want controllable MLB ready talent that can contribute this year or at the latest as August/Sep callups, or they want toolsy prospects like JM with a ton of upside but who are 2 years away at the least? I say the first argument because most posts I see and what Kevin Towers was saying as the direction they were headed in before he was fired. OK if push comes to shove and we have to include Mitchell instead of a Flowers or Hudson then it is worth the gamble, but AGon would have to be open to discussing an extension.