chosk8 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 just heard on mlb.com radio that Hummel is in fact the PTBNL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2003 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 just heard on mlb.com radio that Hummel is in fact the PTBNL Damn. I swear man. With all the good prospects we traded this year we better win this division and make some noise in the playoffs... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Damn. I swear man. With all the good prospects we traded this year we better win this division and make some noise in the playoffs... Tim Hummel is not a "good" prospect. At best Hummel=Graffanino. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2003 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Hummel is having a great year. I've heard about him for a few years now. He finally improved that batting average. Oh well... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2003 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Tim Hummel is not a "good" prospect. At best Hummel=Graffanino. I don't agree with that...But will see... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Chappas Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 The guys we have picked up are have an impact on our team, that is why they cost us good players. Sullivan, Alomar and Everett could have been three of the better acquisitions. Remember we have had two of them for over half a season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2003 Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 The guys we have picked up are have an impact on our team, that is why they cost us good players. Sullivan, Alomar and Everett could have been three of the better acquisitions. Remember we have had two of them for over half a season. I know. But unless we win the division and make some noise in the playoffs we lose in the end... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Tim Hummel is not a "good" prospect. At best Hummel=Graffanino. I disagree. Hummel will equal Graffanino at worst. I'm not saying he is as good now, but Hummel will at least be able to fill that kind of role. I am not commenting on the trade being good or bad, just that I think Hummel will be a solid utility guy at worst. He coudl be better than that in the right situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Tim Hummel is not a "good" prospect. At best Hummel=Graffanino. I'd say Hummel is a good prospect. Take away last year and most people would be calling for him to be the 2nd baseman of the future. Lets remember that it was two years ago when everyone was talking how he was raking through the minors and was going to replace Durham. Not Harris...not Jimenez (Neither were in the system at the time of the talk, then Harris came and later on Jimenez). Last year he struggled early on, surged late, and exploded in the AFL. He's been very good all year this year so other then his first year in AAA, he's been a hitter wherever he's been. Sullivan is a proven reliever that is awesome. The Sox gave up someone at a position of weakness and added something at a position of weakness at the major league level. I'd make the trade in a heartbeat, but I do think Hummel will make it to the majors. I do agree with your assesment that he'll likely become a utility man, but he is patient, has a nice stroke and can play 3 different positions. The guy will get a lot of playing time during his career, imo. As far as the good prospects the Sox have given up this year. I'd rate Rupe and Ring as the best ones given up and then Hummel/Webster in a solid prospect class. Rupe and Ring are high ceiling guys, as is Webster (Without the Power) and Hummel is a productive type guy. I'd say getting Everett, Alomar, Colon, and Sullivan was worth that. Especially when you consider that the Sox, if they lost these guys would get draft pick compensation for Alomar/Colon (I'm confident in that) and their is a good chance they could get it for Everett (If he keeps hitting the way he has been) and Sullivan. Of course this depends on whether the Sox are willing to offer arbitration. Now I don't think the Sox will lose all these guys, but sure, some of them were only playoff run fixes. But if anyone can tell me that renting these guys going for it all and taking the chance isn't worth losing one or two prospects (Considering Sox have the shot to get a couple studs with the draft picks) then I wouldn't want that person as the GM. A GM has to put his team (When it has the Shot) in the position to win it all and I can confidently say that this year Ken Williams did his job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chosk8 Posted August 26, 2003 Author Share Posted August 26, 2003 just heard on mlb.com radio that Hummel is in fact the PTBNL Finally an link... http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...-home-headlines Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cali Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 So that's 3 ex-Sox on the Reds now. Valentine, Jimenez, and Hummel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Tim Hummel=Chris Snopek. He is not a big loss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haywood_Jablome Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 The Sox have seemed to have some luck with their utility guys...Grebeck, Wilson, Graffanino, Norton... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 The Sox have seemed to have some luck with their utility guys...Grebeck, Wilson, Graffanino, Norton... Haywood_Jablome.......oooooo boy best name yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dasox24 Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 I like Hummel and think he'll be a good player, but we needed a RH reliever and we got a good one in Sullivan. So, I still like this trade even though we gave up Hummel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haywood_Jablome Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Haywood_Jablome.......oooooo boy best name yet. Thanks Murcie, you're the second compliment tonight. Like I told Cali, I took some ribbing as a kid. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Haywood_Jablome.......oooooo boy best name yet. I'll agree with you on that. Very creative. By the way, WELCOME ABOARD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capn12 Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 heard that name for a while... Jason, check your PMs please Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Under the circumstances the Sox were in at the time of the deal, I would have pulled the trigger on that trade in a New York minute. No disrespect intended to Hummel, as I think he has a chance to be a solid ML infielder. But, we were desperately in need of a quality RH pitcher in the bullpen, and Sullivan fills that bill to a tee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Under the circumstances the Sox were in at the time of the deal, I would have pulled the trigger on that trade in a New York minute. No disrespect intended to Hummel, as I think he has a chance to be a solid ML infielder. But, we were desperately in need of a quality RH pitcher in the bullpen, and Sullivan fills that bill to a tee. I agree........ I have no problem with pulling that trade.... I would have liked to keep Hummel, but you have to give up something to get something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Thanks Murcie, you're the second compliment tonight. Like I told Cali, I took some ribbing as a kid. lol Please tell me you aren't 16 and thinking that name is original?? It's humorous, I'll give you that, but then again, it was funny 20 years ago when I first heard it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haywood_Jablome Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Please tell me you aren't 16 and thinking that name is original?? It's humorous, I'll give you that, but then again, it was funny 20 years ago when I first heard it. No and no, but it's was original to this site. I thought the board could use a little humor too. Are you really Rex Hudler? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Hudler Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Please tell me you aren't 16 and thinking that name is original?? It's humorous, I'll give you that, but then again, it was funny 20 years ago when I first heard it. No and no, but it's was original to this site. I thought the board could use a little humor too. Are you really Rex Hudler? Nope, real name is Miles..... Miles O'Toole. Cousin is Phil McCracken.... Have a sister that is Anita Dickens.... Her husband is Mike Hunt..... 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.