Does Kenny only make trades with the Phillies, Rangers, and Angels now?
| Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/ |
|
| Dye for Figgins https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=28485 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Beardown [ Mon Jan 12, 2009 11:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Dye for Figgins |
That's the latest rumor. Do it. |
|
| Author: | bigfan [ Tue Jan 13, 2009 12:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
I think that would complete the entire Sox roster for figgins rumors over the past 2 years. |
|
| Author: | good dolphin [ Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
I'm trying to think how this would play out. I assume Figgins would play center and lead off. Quentin would move to RF. I hate this idea but Owens would then play his natural position of LF. Fields starts at third. If he proves himself, great. If not, Figgins moves back to third and you pray that Viciedo proves himself in the minors in RF. Lineup CF Figgins 2B Lillibridge/Getz RF Quentin DH Thome 1B Konerko SS Ramirez C Pierzinski 3B Fields RF Owens That looks like a lineup that would work. I'm deathly afraid of the final two spots in the rotation but they could sign someone with the money saved in the trade. |
|
| Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
Why move CQ? |
|
| Author: | Keyser Soze [ Tue Jan 13, 2009 10:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
Love it. If this happens I think Lillibridge beats out Owens/Wise as the starting left fielder. I see the lineup looking like this (assuming they don't sign Dunn to play LF or Young to play SS): 3B Figgins LF Lillibridge RF Quentin DH Thome 1B Konerko SS Ramirez C AJ CF Anderson 2B Getz/Nix |
|
| Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Tue Jan 13, 2009 10:31 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
| Does Kenny only make trades with the Phillies, Rangers, and Angels now?
|
|
| Author: | RFDC [ Tue Jan 13, 2009 10:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
This deal seems like a no brainer from the Sox side, but why would the Angels want another OFer? Don't they already have a logjam as it is? |
|
| Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Tue Jan 13, 2009 10:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
Maybe the Angels have another deal in the works? Anybody know Figgens' contract situation? |
|
| Author: | good dolphin [ Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
Figgens becomes a FA next year, so obviously signing him to a multi year would have to be part of the deal. Would it be worth exploring taking Mathews Jr. off their hands as well. I know he is being payed far above his capabilities, but he is an excellent CF defensively and I think he is only signed for 2 more years. If the Angels ate some salary, his contract would be palatable. |
|
| Author: | good dolphin [ Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
Keyser Soze wrote: Love it. If this happens I think Lillibridge beats out Owens/Wise as the starting left fielder. I see the lineup looking like this (assuming they don't sign Dunn to play LF or Young to play SS): 3B Figgins LF Lillibridge RF Quentin DH Thome 1B Konerko SS Ramirez C AJ CF Anderson 2B Getz/Nix I didn't even think of Lillibridge in the mix in the OF, but that is even better. I don't think Figgins would be the 3B though. |
|
| Author: | SHARK [ Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
I would make the deal in a heartbeat, considering Chone's ability to lead off, play third base or second base, and steal once he gets on base...While J.D. would give Anaheim another outfielder, with Mark Teixeira now a Yankee, the Angels want to convert one of their current outfielders to first base & split Vlad Guerrero & Gary Matthews, Jr. as DH. Besides, the Angels aren't exactly thrilled about being used as pawns in negotiations for Manny Ramirez... |
|
| Author: | Walt Williams Neck [ Tue Jan 13, 2009 4:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
Figgins is to the Sox, what Roberts is to the Cubs. The Gm's wet dream! |
|
| Author: | Hawkeye Vince [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
Frank Coztansa wrote: Why move CQ? Quentin has the arm strength to play either corner spot. I don't think they have another player other than Anderson to play right. Owens arm is below average. |
|
| Author: | good dolphin [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
Looking at Figgens, Young and Dye a little more closely, I would not trade the former two for Dye straight up. |
|
| Author: | thepoofer [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
If Brent Lillibridge is one of your starting corner outfielders, then you have some serious problems. And Tyler Flowers wasnt brought here to sit on the bench or toil in the minors, the guy is a better hitter than half of the Sox lineup right now. |
|
| Author: | rogers park bryan [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
bigfan wrote: I think that would complete the entire Sox roster for figgins rumors over the past 2 years. Figgins is to the Sox as Roberts is to the Cubs |
|
| Author: | good dolphin [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
There is no way in the world Flowers makes the 2009 team. He has work to do in the minors and AJ has another couple of years on his contract. If it came down to it, I think Viciedo would be the corner OF over Lillibridge. Having seen neither, they are both questionable to me. |
|
| Author: | Keyser Soze [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
thepoofer wrote: If Brent Lillibridge is one of your starting corner outfielders, then you have some serious problems. Why? He's hardly the first player to struggle his first go around in the bigs. He's a better all around ballplayer than Bambie Podsednik. He's a better athlete, a better defender and has a little pop in his bat. I would love to see an outfield of Quentin in Left, Anderson in center and Dye in Right but unfortunately Dye may have to be used to fill some holes in the lineup (3B) and pitching staff (starter). |
|
| Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
poofer, for being "THE (self proclaimed) authority of Chicago sports," you really are a dumbass. |
|
| Author: | Walt Williams Neck [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
rogers park bryan wrote: bigfan wrote: I think that would complete the entire Sox roster for figgins rumors over the past 2 years. Figgins is to the Sox as Roberts is to the Cubs great minds think alike
|
|
| Author: | thepoofer [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
good dolphin wrote: There is no way in the world Flowers makes the 2009 team. He has work to do in the minors and AJ has another couple of years on his contract. If it came down to it, I think Viciedo would be the corner OF over Lillibridge. Having seen neither, they are both questionable to me. What does Flowers have left to prove in the minors? He was traded because hes ready now, and the Braves had no place for him to play. As for Viciedo, with rumors of weight problems, his natural position will be either first or DH |
|
| Author: | thepoofer [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
Frank Coztansa wrote: poofer, for being "THE (self proclaimed) authority of Chicago sports," you really are a dumbass. Do explain, considering every topic Ive brought to focus is an honest evaluation. Lillibridge as a corner just reeks of 2009 being a rebuild year. |
|
| Author: | good dolphin [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
He was in AA last year and really only flowered in the Arizona Fall League. He is supposed to be very raw behind the plate and strikes out too much. He's still young in terms of catcher development. |
|
| Author: | thepoofer [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
good dolphin wrote: He was in AA last year and really only flowered in the Arizona Fall League. He is supposed to be very raw behind the plate and strikes out too much. He's still young in terms of catcher development. Then I seriously have to stop reading these porospect handbooks, because they have this guy as one of the top hitting prospects in all of baseball, but a butcher behind the plate. Honestly Id like this guy on the big team as a backup first baseman/DH kinda guy, but I think that would defeat the pourpose of why they traded for a young catcher. He can hit, I give him that. |
|
| Author: | Keyser Soze [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 4:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
thepoofer wrote: Frank Coztansa wrote: poofer, for being "THE (self proclaimed) authority of Chicago sports," you really are a dumbass. Do explain, considering every topic Ive brought to focus is an honest evaluation. Lillibridge as a corner just reeks of 2009 being a rebuild year. The same way '08 was a rebuilding year with Danks and Floyd in the rotation and Quentin in left and Ramirez at 2b? |
|
| Author: | thepoofer [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 6:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
Keyser Soze wrote: thepoofer wrote: Frank Coztansa wrote: poofer, for being "THE (self proclaimed) authority of Chicago sports," you really are a dumbass. Do explain, considering every topic Ive brought to focus is an honest evaluation. Lillibridge as a corner just reeks of 2009 being a rebuild year. The same way '08 was a rebuilding year with Danks and Floyd in the rotation and Quentin in left and Ramirez at 2b? After the big three in the rotation, what do you have? Your willing to give up a decent, borderline star in Dye, for prospects who are years away, which, if rumors are reality, and fill that void with Lillibridge, who isnt a top prospect? And lets not even bring up that Konerko is done, and Thome cant be counted on and both would have been shipped off if they wernt worthless already and yeah, getting rid of Dye, the only player who isnt a question mark, for prospects does mean KW is circling the white flag and rounding the tents. They are not a better team without him. |
|
| Author: | Keyser Soze [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
thepoofer wrote: After the big three in the rotation, what do you have? I'm sure you said the same thing last off season. thepoofer wrote: And lets not even bring up that Konerko is done He came back from injury to hit 9 home runs in September. I would hardly call that being 'done'. thepoofer wrote: Your willing to give up a decent, borderline star in Dye, for prospects who are years away Who said anything about prospects? The players rumored in these deals are Chone Figgins and Michael Young. thepoofer wrote: and fill that void with Lillibridge, who isnt a top prospect? I saw a recent publication that ranked Lillibridge the 52nd best prospect in all of baseball. |
|
| Author: | Frank Coztansa [ Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
thepoofer wrote: And lets not even bring up that Konerko is done, and Thome cant be counted on and both would have been shipped off if they wernt worthless already and yeah, getting rid of Dye, the only player who isnt a question mark, for prospects does mean KW is circling the white flag and rounding the tents. They are not a better team without him. Dolphin repeatedly has pointed out how Thome, in a bad year for him, was still among top of the stat lists for DHs. Konerko may indeed be done, but he has a full no trade clause. If Kenny has shown one thing during his tenure, its that he is most active in Janurary and February. And that he strives to put a competitive team on the field. |
|
| Author: | good dolphin [ Thu Jan 15, 2009 8:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
Keyser Soze wrote: thepoofer wrote: After the big three in the rotation, what do you have? I'm sure you said the same thing last off season. . Keyser, you are a smart baseball man. You know there are obvious differences between the quality of these two sets of pitching prospects. |
|
| Author: | Keyser Soze [ Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dye for Figgins |
How so? Marquez was a 1st round selection (41st overall) by the Yankees so the talent is obviously there. He had a very good '07 season in AA where he went 15-9 with a 3.65 ERA and was considered the Yanks #7 prospect. Baseball America called him a “workhorse groundball machine who fills the No. 3 or No. 4 spot in the rotation.” He battled injuries last season and fell off the radar like only a Yankee prospect can. Coop is teaching him a cutter that they think will compliment the sinker/changeup he already possesses. I'm not saying he's going to come out of the gate and win 17 games like Gavin Floyd but I'm also not ready to say he can't contribute as the teams 5th starter. As for Clayton Richard, he may not have the overall talent that Floyd, Danks and Marquez have but he showed me a lot last season. I look at the fact that he only walked 13 hitters in 47.2 innings. That kind of confidence to attack hitters is rare in a young pitcher. Again, I'm not expecting 17 wins but I see no reason to think he can't contribute as the teams 4th or 5th starter. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|