It looks as though the first trade of the day was Jarrod Washburn to the Tigers (mynorthwest.com) for LHPs Luke French and Mauricio Robles. The strongest rumblings had pegged Washburn to go to the Yanks, but it wasn't to be. Maybe I am missing something, but I didn't expect the M's to deal him after getting Wilson/Snell from Pittsburgh.
Other deals from the last day or two: - Cubs acquire John Grabow and Tom Gorzelanny from Pittsburgh - Dodgers acquire George Sherrill from Baltimore - Royals acquire Josh Anderson from Detroit - Giants acquire Freddy Sanchez from Pittsburgh - Mariners acquire Jack Wilson and Ian Snell from Pittsburgh
Any thoughts on Halladay, Adrian Gonzalez, Heath Bell, or Victor Martinez?
Wilson and Snell will be around in 2010. Washburn wasn't going to be, and had been built up to an absurdly high level by luck and defense this year. He's really not as good as his numbers are; he's the same guy who they couldn't have gotten 10cents on the dollar last year. If you're going to get ahead by buying low and selling high, you've got to sell high sometimes.
Don't think Halladay or Gonzalez is going anywhere, they're both too valuable and too unlikely to get a fair price. Bell & Martinez seem much more likely.
While Toronto would be hard pressed to get what a pitcher like Halladay is worth, I'd think that they would get more for him now than they would in the offseason or next season, using the logic that a team acquiring him would have him for the rest of this season and next season, instead of just next season or the end of next season.
Originally posted by Peter The HegemonApparently the whole Rolen trade is a favor to Rolen himself, who wanted to be closer to his family. So say the Mets announcers, anyway.
Still doesn't explain why the Reds would make the trade, unless Dusty thinks that it will be an extremely hot August and September, and thus Dusty will be at his mental peak to guide the Reds to a near unbeaten record. At that point, Rolen's bat would make sense.
Originally posted by KevintripodGreat article by Jay Mariotti-
These words should never go together, unless the text of the article is "I quit" or is in fact his suicide note.
Pittsburgh wasn't going to finish anywhere higher than fifth in that division with those guys so why not dump off now and try to totally rebuild, instead of doing it half-assed by moving a couple guys but keeping a few around to keep up appearances? You can quibble with whether they got adequate return in any single trade, but the idea as a whole is fine, and Mariotti is just being his typical whining uninformed clueless bleating hopeless windsock self.
Originally posted by spfPittsburgh wasn't going to finish anywhere higher than fifth in that division with those guys so why not dump off now and try to totally rebuild, instead of doing it half-assed by moving a couple guys but keeping a few around to keep up appearances?
Originally posted by Neil Huntington"We are making these difficult and unpopular decisions because we are trying to create a winner," said General Manager Neal Huntington. "We don't feel like we've broken up the 1927 Yankees."
Hmmm....Pearce/McCutchen vs. Gehrig/Ruth. Well, it's close, anyway!
Is the investigation about why they didn't do this sooner?
Sorry, but I'm not a Bob Nutting fan. In my eyes he cares nothing about winning. He just uses the Pirates to line his pockets with money.
I wouldn't have a problem with this player dumping one bit if I knew that we had an owner that would eventually sign good players that developed from these trades (if there will be any). I don't care what anyone says, Nutting will never extend the Pirates payroll beyond $50M, even if they are able to develop a batch of good players. His policy of making himself at least a $15M to $20M profit each season comes before anything. Now I know he owns the team and he can do whatever he wants with it and it's his right blah blah blah, but it doesn't mean I have to like it. I want an owner that either breaks even at the end of the season, or puts whatever profit he makes back into the team. Nutting does neither.
Ok, I'm done ranting. It's just that I love the Pirates and I'm just sick of seeing the same "5 year plan" scenario play out over and over again.
The best part of waking up is not Folgers in your cup, but knowing that Chuck Norris didn't kill you in your sleep.
The White Sox are on crack and just claimed Alex Rios and his off the wall contract off waivers Click Here (sports.espn.go.com) Maybe, Rios rebounds ... sure he's young, but I don't risk this kind of money on that kind of gamble.
I think it is a good move for the White Sox. Don't give up any players, and they are going to have salary coming off in the off-season in Dye and Thome. Change of scenery and playing in games that matter might help Rios. If not, it can just be viewed in the same manner as a bad free agent signing, and even then you would lose a draft pick in the process.
I think Kenny Williams has done a pretty darn good job for the White Sox over the years, so I'm not going to dismiss the move out of hand. You'd think with that contract on a team 'selling', there must have been a discussion with the Chairman over taking on this sort of a contract.
What it does for the team? Word on the street is that Rios will effectively take Jermaine Dye's starting spot next year, so I think you evaluate it from that point of view:
Money: 5 remaining years at $59 million? I would think with the economy, you could have had Dye (or a suitable OF replacement) at $12 mil per season. And Dye wouldn't have needed 5 years.
Batting: Closer than I would have expected before looking... aside from his one MVP-caliber '06 season, Dye is a long ball threat with an OPS in the mid 800's. Rios' '06 and '07 seasons were right in that range. The rub is that he's fallen off the last two years.
Fielding: Rios is said to be a good fielder - not outstanding, but I think clearly an upgrade.
Other: Rios also brings speed and a stolen base threat to the lineup that the Sox have been missing - provided his stroke comes back. Dye would also be 36 starting a new contract next year, and if we are really in a post-steroid era you may start seeing performance dropping off quicker again.
My only criticism is that I don't see this as a game-changer for the team this year, and wouldn't you be able to make a deal for Rios in the off-season? It's a pretty big gamble when you could have taken that $60 million into next winter and the free agent market. But I imagine Williams has had his eye on Rios for some time now, and saw a chance to get him without giving up any prospects.
I look at it this way, Rios at his best is worth his contract. Even at this year's production, if he provides it from CF he is overpaid but not horrifically so. He solidifies a position that has been ugly since 2005. The Sox have/had the flexibility to take on obligations going forward with all the deals coming off in the next two seasons (Dye, Thome, Konerko, Contreras, Dotel, Pierzynski) so that even now they are still only on the hook for $60 million or so in 2011. To get someone with the ability of Rios for nothing but money is hard to pass up.
There wa a wire story that ex-Baltimore Orioles Manager (and ex-Indians) has taken a position in the Tribe's front office. Does this mean that the current manger, youngest in the league, is on a short leash? Is Grover there as insurance for the Tribe?