Jump to content

What if we'd kept Gio Gonzalez?


VAfan

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 113
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ May 30, 2012 -> 08:57 PM)
I have been saying this for years, and maybe people are starting to realize it....

 

The Nick Swisher trade is the worst deal Kenny has ever made.

 

Im going to have to say Hudson, Holmberg, and Edwin Jackson for Zach Stewart pretty much is the worst cumulative deal KW has ever done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Papa Tru @ May 30, 2012 -> 08:50 PM)
Yawn.

 

Those "prospects" will never amount to anything for us. Ill kill myself and post it on youtube if any of them make any great contributions to this franchise.

 

You don't give away a front of the rotation starter to "save money" on a stupid deal YOU did in the first place. All we have to show for Daniel Hudson and Edwin Jackson is Zach Stewart, a mediocre reliever. Yowza.

 

Trading prospects, bad. Trading for prospects, bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Papa Tru @ May 30, 2012 -> 09:04 PM)
Im going to have to say Hudson, Holmberg, and Edwin Jackson for Zach Stewart pretty much is the worst cumulative deal KW has ever done.

But Holmberg is just a prospect! Will you kill yourself and put it on youtube if he doesn't end up contributing anything to the DBacks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 30, 2012 -> 09:06 PM)
But Holmberg is just a prospect! Will you kill yourself and put it on youtube if he doesn't end up contributing anything to the DBacks?

 

Of course not, I don't care about the Dbacks organization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Gio trades don't bother me now. He was super young in the Thome trade. The Swisher trade looks bad looking back, but it's just an offseason trade that didn't work out.

 

The Hudson/Holmberg trade however was just bad. The team wasn't in a position to be making that gamble on Jackson being that guy to put them over the top. That 2010 team started 24-33, had a 26-5 run, and then crashed back to earth.

 

And if you're curious what Holmberg is up to...

 

http://www.milb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?s...&pid=571787

 

Tell you what...if the Sox win the World Series this year, I'll never mention Hudson and Holmberg again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 30, 2012 -> 09:05 PM)
Trading prospects, bad. Trading for prospects, bad.

 

And 2K5 is right on queue with his try to be funny, add nothing to the discussion one liners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (flavum @ May 30, 2012 -> 08:07 PM)
The Gio trades don't bother me now. He was super young in the Thome trade. The Swisher trade looks bad looking back, but it's just an offseason trade that didn't work out.

 

The Hudson/Holmberg trade however was just bad. The team wasn't in a position to be making that gamble on Jackson being that guy to put them over the top. That 2010 team started 24-33, had a 26-5 run, and then crashed back to earth.

 

And if you're curious what Holmberg is up to...

 

http://www.milb.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?s...&pid=571787

 

Tell you what...if the Sox win the World Series this year, I'll never mention Hudson and Holmberg again.

Still in high A ball...I'm not going to worry about him yet...but yeah, as much as I want to continue to defend that one, it was just too much of a reach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Papa Tru @ May 30, 2012 -> 09:08 PM)
And 2K5 is right on queue with his try to be funny, add nothing to the discussion one liners.

 

The position you are taking is ridiculous. If you are going to blast the organization for trading away prospects, you can't blast them for trading for prospects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 30, 2012 -> 09:01 PM)
I don't think there are a whole lot of people who disagreed with that, especially since 2009 or so...

 

That being said, I don't think it's fair to consider what happened here with Swisher as anything that could have been expected.

 

It seems the loudest people here are still whining over the Hudson deal, and I've been saying Gio is going to be the better pitcher when it's all said and done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ May 30, 2012 -> 09:10 PM)
The position you are taking is ridiculous. If you are going to blast the organization for trading away prospects, you can't blast them for trading for prospects.

 

Im blasting KW for making more poor trades than he does good or even DECENT ones.

 

HOWEVER

 

My original point was you cant compare Marlins or Royals fans wondering what if about Humber and De Aza to us saying S.O.B we should have Gio right now. Or we should have Hudson right now.

 

They were cast off, we traded them away. Its not the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Papa Tru @ May 30, 2012 -> 09:50 PM)
Yawn.

 

Those "prospects" will never amount to anything for us. Ill kill myself and post it on youtube if any of them make any great contributions to this franchise.

Aw can't it be a guy high on bath salts eating your face?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ May 30, 2012 -> 08:12 PM)
It seems the loudest people here are still whining over the Hudson deal, and I've been saying Gio is going to be the better pitcher when it's all said and done.

I think it's because Hudson was immediately successful with the DBacks after we traded him. At least the A's had to develop Gio a bit...he didn't start the next week and begin dominating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 30, 2012 -> 09:19 PM)
I think it's because Hudson was immediately successful with the DBacks after we traded him. At least the A's had to develop Gio a bit...he didn't start the next week and begin dominating.

 

A lot of people were against trading Hudson

 

I was for the trade at the time, but its just turned out awful for us.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ May 30, 2012 -> 10:12 PM)
It seems the loudest people here are still whining over the Hudson deal, and I've been saying Gio is going to be the better pitcher when it's all said and done.

I would still complain about the Hudson deal more even if Gio wins a Cy Young. The Gio deal I at least get. It was filling a need the team clearly had. The Hudson deal drives me nuts about how useless/unnecessary it was compared to what the team actually needed. It needed a LH bat and to develop some young pitching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ May 30, 2012 -> 10:12 PM)
It seems the loudest people here are still whining over the Hudson deal, and I've been saying Gio is going to be the better pitcher when it's all said and done.

 

 

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 30, 2012 -> 10:19 PM)
I think it's because Hudson was immediately successful with the DBacks after we traded him. At least the A's had to develop Gio a bit...he didn't start the next week and begin dominating.

I wasn't upset with them dealing Hudson at the time because, salary aside, it looked like a fairly even trade stat-wise.

 

I'm upset that Rizzo bamboozled KW into being forced to keep Jackson instead of completing the 3 way to get Dunn.

 

THEN Rizzo gets the Sox #1 on top of it the following season, with the Sox signing Dunn as a type A, AND he signs Jackson as a free agent for free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 30, 2012 -> 08:21 PM)
I would still complain about the Hudson deal more even if Gio wins a Cy Young. The Gio deal I at least get. It was filling a need the team clearly had. The Hudson deal drives me nuts about how useless/unnecessary it was compared to what the team actually needed. It needed a LH bat and to develop some young pitching.

See Knight's post above mine...I wonder if he actually intended to keep Jackson or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (knightni @ May 30, 2012 -> 09:22 PM)
I wasn't upset with them dealing Hudson at the time because, salary aside, it looked like a fairly even trade stat-wise.

 

I'm upset that Rizzo bamboozled KW into being forced to keep Jackson instead of completing the 3 way to get Dunn.

 

THEN Rizzo gets the Sox #1 on top of it the following season, with the Sox signing Dunn as a type A, AND he signs Jackson as a free agent for free.

 

^^^ this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 30, 2012 -> 10:25 PM)
See Knight's post above mine...I wonder if he actually intended to keep Jackson or not.

And that excuse would drive me nuts even more, because you don't complete the first trade if you don't want the player. That would be a fireable fail.

 

Anyway, we saw that go down on The Club and it sure seemed like Kenny wanted Jackson, and I still think that was nuts. Anyway, I've got nothing new to add on that, so that's my final word, despise that trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Papa Tru @ May 30, 2012 -> 09:12 PM)
Im blasting KW for making more poor trades than he does good or even DECENT ones.

 

HOWEVER

 

My original point was you cant compare Marlins or Royals fans wondering what if about Humber and De Aza to us saying S.O.B we should have Gio right now. Or we should have Hudson right now.

 

They were cast off, we traded them away. Its not the same.

 

And yet you are flat out dismissing all of the prospects we traded for, while pining for the prospects we traded away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...